m^'^ 




ii'.'AO., 




teMiiW&^^i^iL^ 







'v/% *«;<),* »•><♦< 







y^^ 



.•<k-^>:^^' 



.$^<;^<^^ 









^' ^-^^- "'^ 









klBRARY OF CONGRESS. I 



^^^^*^S*c^ 



/ A. 1 



.^%m\a B.7^ 



>^^-^^^ 



# 



f UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, f 

# f 






^'^m^^ 






m 









^^<^.$4sisr 



"c^ 

^%:^- 







^^^^is^4s^^ 






■^'^y 



wm-'- 



k\^^ 



^'i0f 



^^^ ^^-^;-'// ^■■^,r^'^'' ■■^'^"^^"■^^ 



"-^^■' sr^l-'^V:^^^^ 



■ -\ vw^lt 



--^^^ 













ijSju^^ 



,fcu* »^ 



»J#i^' 



*s5sr^\ 



^^*^s^O^ 










^#iJgW^' 










RECENT CONTEST 



RHODE ISLAND. 



CAMBRIDGE: METCALF, KEITH, AND NICHOLS, PRINTERS TO THE UNIVERSITY. 



THE 



RECENT CONTEST 



RHODE ISLAND: 



A R T I C L E 



THE NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW, 



FOR APRIL, 1644. 



^^rzr^ 


-itr. 







BOSTON: 

OTIS, BROADERS, AND COMPANY. 

1844. 






Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1844, by 

Otis, Broaders, «S: Co., 

in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. 



CAMBRIDGE: 

METCALF, KEITH, AND NICHOLS, 

PRINTERS TO THE UNIVERSITY. 



THE 



RECENT CONTEST 



IN 



RHODE ISLAND. 



1. ^n Mdress to the People of Rhode Island, delivered 
in JSTewport, May 3, 1843, in Presence of the General 
Assembly, on Occasion of tJie Change in the Civil Gov- 
ernment of Rhode Island. By William G. Goddard. 
Providence : 1843. 8vo. pp. 80. 

2. A Concise History of the Efforts to obtain an Extension 
of Suffrage in Rhode Island, from the Year 1811 to 
1842. By Jacob Frieze. Providence : 1842. 
12mo. pp. 171. 

3. The Affairs of Rhode Island : a Discourse delivered in 
Providence, May 22, 1842. By Francis Wayland. 
Providence : 1842. 8vo. pp. 32. 

4. Charge of the Honorable Chief Justice Durfee to the 
Grand Jury, at the March Term of the Supreme Judi- 
cial Court at Bristol, R. I. 1842. 8vo. pp. 16. 

5. A Review of Dr. Wayland'' s Discourse on the Affairs 
of Rhode Island ; a Vindication of the Sovereignty of 
the People, and a Refutation of the Doctrines and Doc- 
tors of Despotism. By A Member of the Boston 
Bar. Boston : B. B. Mussey. 1842. 8vo. pp. 30. 

6. An Address to the People of Rhode Island on the ap- 
proaching Election. By John Whipple. Provi- 
dence : 1843. 8vo. pp. 16. 

7. Considerations on the Questions of the Adoption of a 
Constitution and Extension of Suffrage in Rhode Island. 
By Elisha R. Potter. Boston : Thomas H. Webb 
& Co. 1842. 8vo. pp. 64. 



6 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

8. A Reply to the Letter of the Honorable Marcus Morton^ 
late Governor of Massachusetts^ on the Rhode Island 
Question. By One of the Rhode Island Peo- 
ple. Providence : 1842. 8vo. pp. 32. 

9. The Close of the late Rebellion in Rhode Island : an 
Extract from a Letter by a Massachusetts Man, resident 
in Providence. Second Edition. Providence : B. 
Cranston & Co. 1842. 8vo. pp. 16. 

10. .^ Letter to the Hon. Samuel W. King., late Governor 
of the State of Rhode Island. By Benjamin Cowell. 
Second Edition, with an Appendix. 1842. 

The disturbances in Rhode Island are ended. The new 
form of civil government, the establishment of which cre- 
ated a revolutionary scene of the most exciting character, 
actually kindling a civil war within the limits of the State, 
and menacing the tranquillity of the Union, has gone quietly 
into operation, hardly a show of opposition being maintained 
against it. The friends of law and order,- as they styled 
themselves, have achieved a signal victory, and they have 
not made an ungenerous use of it towards their vanquished 
opponents. They have wisely tempered justice with mercy, 
and not allowed the angry passions, which were somewhat 
stifled by defeat, to be again exasperated by privation and 
punishment. These passions, therefore, have in a great 
measure subsided, although a bitter recollection is left in the 
minds of many, which is kept alive by the evident exultation 
of the triumphant party. The fire has burned out, though 
the ashes are not yet cold. 

It is a good time, then, to take a calm historical view of 
the matter, and to extract from it whatever lessons of politi- 
cal wisdom it may be calculated to afford. The question 
which lies at the bottom of the controversy is one of absorb- 
ing interest for every inhabitant of this country, and for ev- 
ery student of the nature and effects of a free government. 
It is of a speculative character, so far as it involves the 
problem respecting the origin and rightful existence of ev- 
ery form of civil pohty ; and it is pi'actical, so far as the 
changeable nature of our political institutions allows it to 
come up from time to time, and to be discussed with espe- 
cial reference to proposed essential modifications of the fun- 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 7 

* 

damental laws of the States. The recent occurrences in 
Rhode Island afford a precedent and an illustration to be 
used in all future controversies of the like character. The 
decision in this case must exert an important influence on all 
future decisions of similar questions. It is well, therefore, 
to consider it now, when the excitement immediately attend- 
ing the affair has ceased, and before the points at issue are 
obscured, and the discussion perplexed, by the passions 
aroused by another incipient revolution in State politics. 

The question has little bearing on the present strife of 
parties in the United States. Whigs and Democrats were 
arrayed indifferently on either side of the contest in Rhode 
Island, and in the eagerness with which they engaged in this 
local warfare, they seemed to forget or to spurn the ties 
which bound them to the two great parties that divided the 
whole country. The civil war severed all attachments to 
parties in national politics, just as, in many cases, it ruptured 
all family ties, and arrayed brother against brother, and 
father against son. Not till a comparatively late period in 
the struggle, did the managers of the old parties in the other 
States attempt to lay hold of this local contest, and to con- 
vert it into what is now usually termed, in the jargon of the 
day, "political capital " for their own purposes. With this 
attempted application and management of the dispute, we 
have nothing to do or to say. The question does not con- 
cern a tariff, or a bank, or internal improvements, or the dis- 
tribution of the public lands. It relates solely to the exten- 
sion of the right of suffrage, the duty of obedience to exist- 
ing forms of government, the stability of our political insti- 
tutions, and the right of revolution. We have a right to 
consider it, therefore, without abandoning that neutral posi- 
tion in respect to the politics of the day, which this Journal 
has always studiously maintained. 

When the connexion between Great Britain and her 
American Colonies was broken by the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence, the people of this country did not at once aban- 
don all their civil institutions, and fall back into a state of 
nature, there to begin the process of forming a government 
anew and from the very foundations of social life. They 
adhered closely to their old usages and institutions, their 
attachment to them appearing from the very fact, that it was 



8 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

only the violation of these ancient forms and privileges by 
the arbitrary conduct of the British ministry, which produced 
the separation from England. The people availed them- 
selves of their newly acquired freedom, not to pull down 
their old houses, and build new ones, but to restore and re- 
pair the ancient homestead. The Colonies retained their 
independent position with respect to each other, the old 
boundary lines being in every case preserved. The only 
difference was, that as they were formerly united only by 
the tie of common allegiance, so they were now held togeth- 
er only by concert and agreement upon measures for mutual 
defence. New England maintained her primitive divisions 
into townships, and the established forms of transacting busi- 
ness in them, through the primary assemblies of the people. 
The inhabitants of the Southern Colonies preserved their 
old county lines, their parishes, and their more centralized 
forms of civil administration. Over the whole country, the 
great body of the common law was preserved intact, merely 
the unnecessary adjuncts being cut away, by casting off alle- 
giance to the crown, and no longer acknowdedging the su- 
premacy of parliament. The courts of law remained open, 
and the general organization of the judiciary was left undis- 
turbed. 

In those Colonies to which the crown had not expressly 
granted a charter of liberties, or to which the grant was so 
narrow, that the local government was constantly checked 
and controlled by English authority, and the administration 
of affairs was made quite dependent on the action of the 
English ministry, the dissolution of the union with Great Brit- 
ain created a necessity of organizing the government anew, 
so that it might be administered by itself. A new establish- 
ment was needed for the exercise of the new powers acquir- 
ed by the assumption of independence. The necessity was 
perceived, and measures were promptly taken to meet it. 
While the war still raged, and the issue of it was yet uncer- 
tain, while the smoke of battle still hung over the plains, and 
the cannon thundered in the distance, the people went calm- 
ly to work to appoint delegates, to hold conventions, and to 
form and establish new constitutions of government. Never 
was manifested a more sublime confidence in the ultimate 
triumph of a just cause. The people never doubted the 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 9 

issue of the struggle. While every limb was yet braced and 
every muscle strained in the contest, they quietly made 
preparations for the state of things that was to ensue, when 
Great Britain should acknowledge her defeat, and the 
Americans should take their stand among the independent 
nations of the earth. Peace was not declared till 1783 ; 
New Hampshire formed a constitution in 1775 ; New Jer- 
sey, South Carolina, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Ma- 
ryland, and North Carolina, in 1776, the first three before 
the date of the Declaration of Independence ; Georgia and 
New York, in 1777 ; Massachusetts, in 1780. The forms 
of government thus established were not arbitrary and novel, 
created by mere speculation, and dependent for success on 
future experiment. They xoere founded on existing institu- 
tions ; they recognized preexistent rights ; they authorized 
ancient customs. They supplied omissions, it is true ; but 
they made no unnecessary innovations. They were the old 
forms of polity, adopted by the first settlers on this continent, 
with such modifications only as were rendered necessary by 
the transition from a state of partial, to one of perfect, in- 
dependence. They were not made by philosophers and 
theorists, but by practical men. 

It would not be a difficult task to analyze the constitutions 
first established by each of the thirteen Colonies, especially 
those of New England, and to trace almost every important 
enactment in them to provisions in the old charters, or to 
privileges tacitly granted by the crown, or to customs found- 
ed on long prescription. We shall have occasion hereafter 
to consider more particularly the doctrines and the practice 
of the men of the American Revolution. Our only purpose 
here is to point out the unanimity of opinion and conduct, in 
this respect, of all the Colonies at the time when they eman- 
cipated themselves from British rule ; — to show, that while 
some adopted what we are accustomed to consider as " new " 
constitutions, and some did not, all adhered, with greater or 
less fidelity, as the case required^ to the forms and institu- 
tions with which they were familiar from long experiment, 
and which were endeared to them by old associations. We 
can characterize their practice in a word, by saying, that it 
was the very opposite of that of the French theorists, who, 
from 1789 till 1800, successively formed and annihilated 
2 



10 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

merely speculative constitutions, with such naarvellous rapidi- 
ty, for their unhappy and distracted country. 

It was the good fortune of Connecticut and Rhode Island, 
that, for a long period before the Revolution, even from the 
time of their first settlement, they had enjoyed essentially 
republican forms of government. They obtained charters 
from the crown, respectively in 1662 and the following 
year, which, in fact, with merely nominal reservations, em- 
powered the people to govern themselves. Chalmers, a 
royalist writer of the Revolutionary period, objects to these 
charters as establishing " a mere democracy, or rule of the 
people." Governor Bernard, in his private correspondence 
with the British ministry,* speaks of "the two republics of 
Rhode Island and Connecticut," and says there will be no 
security for the prerogative in the other Colonies, so long as 
these two "democratic governments " are allowed to exist. 
That such language was properly applied to them appears on 
the very face of the charters, which, in truth, authorized the 
people to choose all their own officers^ and enact all their 
own laws. " The laws of these States," says Grahame, the 
able and impartial historian of America, " were not subject 
to the negative, nor the judgment of their tribunals to the 
review, of the king." Nay, "so perfectly democratic were 
their constitutions, that in neither of them was the governor 
suffered to exercise a negative on the resolutions of the As- 
sembly." These were the great privileges they enjoyed, 
and which distinguished them above every other Colony in 
America. There was no necessity, therefore, for amend- 
ing or abrogating the charters, when the union with England 
was dissolved. The merely formal limitations of the power 
of the Colonists, — the provision, for instance, that their 
laws and ordinances should be " not contrary and repug- 
nant unto,f but as near as may be agreeable to, the laws of 
this our realm of England," — then expired of themselves, 

* Manuscript Records of the Board of Trade, from copies obtained by a 
friend, which he has kindly allowed us to examine. 

t "There were no regular means ofascertaining this conformity, these 
States not being obliged, like Massachusetts, to transmit their laws to Eng- 
land. On a complaint from an inhabitant of Connecticut, aggrieved by the 
operation of a particular law, it was declared by the king in council, ' that 
their law concerning dividing land inheritance of an intestate was contrary 
to the law of England and void'; but the Colony paid no regard to this 
declaration." Grahame, 1. 421. 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 1 1 

and from the necessity of the case. After the Revolution, 
the people continued, as they had done before, to " admit 
freemen, choose officers, make laws and ordinances, array 
the martial force of the Colony for the common defence, 
enforce martial law, and exercise other important powers 
and prerogatives."* In so doing, they conformed to the 
practice of all the other Colonies at the same epoch, by ad- 
hering as closely as possible to their ancient rights, usages, 
and institutions. They preserved both the substance and 
the form of the constituted body politic throughout the con- 
vulsions of the Revolutionary period. During that storm, 
they did not sink or abandon the ship ; they only deposed 
the commander, and changed the flag. 

Although these charters were granted by Charles the Sec- 
ond, they derived their whole force and efficacy within the Col- 
onies themselves from the formal and voluntary acceptance 
of them by the people. They were not imposed upon the 
Colonists, but were solicited by them ; they were granted, 
or allowed, and not enacted, by the sovereign power. The 
drafts were made by the Colonial agents, acting under the 
instructions of their constituents ; they were sanctioned by 
the monarch at their solicitation. After the Revolution in 
1660, the people of Rhode Island thought their old charter, 
procured by Roger Williams in 1643, having been obtained 
from the parliament under the Commonwealth, would not be 
respected by the king ; and they therefore appointed Mr. John 
Clarke, who was then in England, to be their agent " for the 
preservation of their chartered rights and privileges.^'' He 
succeeded in his mission, and a new instrument was granted 
by the king. This new charter of Rhode Island was receiv- 
ed in November, 1663, by the Court of Commissioners at 
Newport, " at a very great meeting and assembly of the free- 
men of the Colony." It was then accepted, ratified, and 
made the fundamental law of Rhode Island and the Providence 
Plantations. " Thanks to the King, thanks to Lord Chan- 
cellor Clarendon, and thanks and a gratuity of one hundred 
pounds to Mr. Clarke, their agent, were unanimously voted.^'' 
A more expressive and striking scene of a people forming a 
government for themselves, and making it binding on them- 

* The language is that of Jiidife t^lory, who tlius enunjerates the powers 
■which llie people of Rhode Ishind exercised under the charter. Cvmvum- 
taries on the, Conslitulion. Abridged edition, p. 13b. 



12 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

selves and their posterity, was never witnessed. The next 
day after the charter was received, the old government sur- 
rendered to the new. 

Of course, the fundamental law of the body politic, thus 
formed and solemnly ratified, was to continue until abrogated 
by the same power which created it. This power was a 
formal vote of the freemen of the Colony, at a meeting le- 
gally called and authorized. The government and the char- 
ter ratified by that vote did continue, till it became the old- 
est constitutional charter in the world. " This charter of 
government," says Mr. Bancroft, writing in 1836, " con- 
stituting, as it then seemed, a pure democracy, and estab- 
lishing a political system which few besides the Rhode 
Islanders themselves believed to be practicable, is still in 
existence ;" and " nowhere in the world have life, liberty, 
and property been safer than in Rhode Island." During the 
reign of James the Second, and the arbitrary rule of Sir 
Edmund Andros, it was suspended, but not abrogated, nor 
forfeited. After the revolution of 1688, the Colony re- 
sumed it, and continued to niaintain and exercise its powers 
down to a very recent period. Even the crown lawyers 
and the other favorers of the prerogative, who were then 
numerous and active, who succeeded at this time in destroy- 
ing the old charter of Massachusetts, and who hated the 
" democratic governments " of Rhode Island and Connec- 
ticut, could not, on the ground of the acts of James and the 
change in the dynasty at home, destroy these charters, or 
prevent them from continuing in effect. 

If the revolution of 1688 did not annul the charters, so 
neither did the revolution of 1776. At both periods, there 
was a change of the sovereign power in the state ; at the 
former, it was transferred, contrary to custom and the usual 
course of law, from one person to another ; at the latter, it 
was taken away from an individual, and vested in the state 
itself; that is, in the constituted body politic, — " the peo- 
ple." George the Third forfeited his power in America in 
the same way in which James the Second lost his throne in 
England, — by arbitrary and oppressive acts, done in viola- 
tion of law. But the constitution and the charter survived 
both these shocks. The Bill of Rights adopted in the for- 
mer case embodies nearly the same essential principles as 
our own Declaration of Independence. It recognized the 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 1 3 

power of the state to change its sovereign, without being 
obliged at the same time to destroy itself, or to resolve the 
body politic into its primitive elements, and to begin the 
work of forming society and government anew. In England, 
the monarch was dethroned, or — in the more gentle but 
lying phrase of the day — he had "abdicated" ; and par- 
liament assumed the power to absolve Englishmen from the 
duty of allegiance to him, and to confer the crown upon 
William and Mary. They did not go about forming a new 
constitution, and organizing a new government. Their work 
was not destructive, but conservative. They did not need 
even to reaffirm preexistent statutes and principles, except 
those few the authority of which had been marred or violat- 
ed by the arbitrary conduct of the Stuarts, and which were 
therefore specified, and enacted over again, as it were, in 
the Bill of Rights. Their silence about new forms proved 
that they recognized the old, which, having once been for- 
mally established, were to continue to exist until they should 
be as formally abrogated. Therefore, the constitution at 
home and the charters in the Colonies — those of them, at 
least, which had not been positively annulled by the decree 
of a court of law — continued to exist and to preserve their 
binding force ; and neither Jacobites, crown lawyers, nor 
patriots questioned their legal authority. 

The case was precisely the same at the time of the Amer- 
can Revolution. The people of Rhode Island and Connec- 
ticut did not annul their charters at this period, for they 
were attached to these instruments, which had been the, 
guardians of their liberties and their rights for more than a 
century, and had made them the envy of the surrounding 
Colonies. They did not enact or accept them over again, 
for such an act would have implied, that these instruments 
bad possessed no rightful force or legal efficacy for the past. 
The Colonies became independent States just as children 
become men ; they did not forfeit their birthright because 
they had attained their majority. Under these charters, 
Rhode Island and Connecticut became parties to the Dec- 
laration of Independence. This new deed of their liber- 
ties, the " Magna Charta" of America, was signed by del- 
egates appointed to Congress, in behalf of these Colonies, by 
the General Assemblies therein legally constituted, according 
to old usage. These delegates, by signing the Declaration, 
2* 



14 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

did not destroy or annul their respective governments at home. 
Such an act would have been suicidal, for their own authority 
as delegates was derived from these governments. They were 
not chosen for such a purpose, nor were they subsequently 
empowered to effect it. They were appointed to consult with 
the delegates from the other Colonies for the common wel- 
fare, and if need were, to throw oft^a foreign yoke ; but not to 
cancel the safeguards of their domestic liberties, and the fun- 
damental laws of the bodies politic whom they represented. 

Under these charters, also, Rhode Island and Connecti- 
cut became parties to the Confederation of 1778. They 
entered into this league, not as mere aggregations of individ- 
uals, bound together by no tie but the interests of the mo- 
ment ; but as sovereign States, legally constituted, formally 
governed, and acting by their appointed representatives. 
Under the same charters, also, the legislatures of these 
States called conventions of the people, who accepted the 
Federal Constitution of 1787, and thus became members of 
our present union. A new law was thus ratified in the 
same manner as the charters had been, — by conventions 
legally called and empowered to represent the whole people. 
This new law, in a certain sense, acted over the old govern- 
ments of the several States, without displacing or destroying 
them. When Rhode Island signified her adherence to the 
Constitution in 1790, she received from the other parties to 
that instrument the guaranty of " a republican form of gov- 
ernment," and an assurance of protection " against invasion 
and against domestic violence." Of course, those other 
parties, by admitting this State into the union, recognized 
her form of polity and her civil administration, as then es- 
tablished, as "a republican government." Otherwise, they 
were bound by this guaranty instantly to fit out troops, or 
adopt other measures, to create or restore the republicanism 
of that government. 

Under the charters thus ratified and confirmed, not only 
by the people of Rhode Island and Connecticut, but by the 
authorities of the whole union, these two States continued 
to exist and to be governed for a long period. Connecticut 
retained her charter till 1818, when some changes being re- 
quired by the voice of the people, legal measures were taken 
in due form, under the authority of the legislature, and in 
conformity to the practice in other States, to form a new 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 1 5 

constitution, which was accepted and ratified by the people, 
and went peaceably into efiect. Rhode Island retained hers 
till 1843, when, in the same manner, she formed and adopt- 
ed a new constitution, which is now in operation. It is to the 
history of the contest which preceded this alteration in her 
form of government, that we are now to direct our attention. 

But before we attempt to give a brief sketch of these oc- 
currences, it is necessary to consider what was the law and 
the practice upon that point under the old government, on 
which the whole controversy turned ; we mean the right of 
suffrage.* When Roger Williams and his associates formed 
a settlement at Providence, in 1636, they incorporated them- 
selves into a "town fellowship." The earliest records of 
their proceedings, which are now extant, contain the follow- 
ing entry, under the date of August 20th, 1637. 

" We, whose names are here under, desirous to inhabit the 
town of Providence, do promise to subject ourselves in active and 
passive obedience to all such orders and agreements as shall be 
made for public good of the body in an orderly way, by the ma- 
jor consent of the present inhabitants, masters of families, incor- 
porated together into a town fellowship, and others whom they 
shall admit unto them, only in civil things." 

The last clause, " only in civil things," marks the stead- 
fast attachment of Roger Williams and his associates to the 
principles of rehgious liberty and the freedom of conscience. 
William Coddington and his company formed another settle- 
ment on the island of Rhode Island in 1637-8, and agreed 
to the following compact. 

" We, whose names are underwritten, do swear solemnly, in 
the presence of Jehovah, to incorporate ourselves into a body 
politic, and, as He shall help us, will submit oiir persons, our 
lives, and estates unto our Lord Jesus Christ, the King of kings 
and Lord of lords, and to all those most perfect and absolute 
laws of His, given us in his holy word of truth, to be guided and 
judged thereby." 

* We are indebted for many of the facts which follow, relalinff to the 
early history of Rhode Island, to an excellent memorial, respecting the suf- 
frage question, addressed to the General Assembly early in 18')'2, and soon 
afterwards published in a pamphlet of twenty-four pages. It has no signa- 
ture, but was written, we believe, by Judge Pitman, and bears for title only 
the following inscription : " To the' Members of the General Assembly of 
Rhode Island." We are also under considerable obligation for historical facts 
to an admirable pamphlet on the same subject, the title of which is placed at 
the head of this article, written by Mr. Elisha R. Potter, now a member of 
the House of Representatives of the United States. 



16 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

This company declared, in 1641—2, that their govern- 
ment was " a democracie, or popular government," and that 
the power to make laws, and depute ministers to execute 
them, was " in the body of freemen, orderly assembled, or 
a major part of them." They admitted to the elective 
franchise from time to time such other persons as came 
to join them, and " upon orderly presentation were found 
meet for the service of the body, and no just exception 
against them^ None but those regularly admitted were al- 
lowed to take part in the affairs of government, although it 
appears, from the separate lists kept of the freemen and the 
inhabitants, that many of the latter were not admitted. The 
two settlements, at Providence and on the island, were 
united into one, in 1643, under the first charter ; and in 
1647, they admitted into their company a third settlement, 
which had been formed at Warwick five years before. 
Thus it appears, that there were originally three distinct set- 
tlements in this State, entirely independent of each other. 
The charter obtained in 1663 required, that the General 
Assembly should be composed of the Governor, Deputy 
Governor, the Assistants, and " such of the freemen of the 
said Company as shall be so as aforesaid elected or de- 
puted ; " and it authorized the Assembly " to choose, nom- 
inate, and appoint such and so many other persons as they 
shall think fit, and shall be willing to accept the same, to 
be free of the said company and body politic, and them into 
the same to admit." 

It seems, therefore, that the charter confined the right of 
suffrage to the " freemen " of the Company, as was former- 
ly the case in Massachusetts ; but the power rested entirely 
with the General Assembly to determine what qualifications 
should be required of a freeman. In other words, any per- 
son might be admitted free of the Company by those who 
were freemen, or voters, already. In 1665, the General 
Assembly, in pursuance of the authority thus granted to 
them, declared, " that all men of competent estates,'''' and 
possessing " sufficient testimony of their fitness and qualifi- 
cations as shall by the General Assembly be deemed satis- 
tactory," should be admitted as freemen, and that no others 
should enjoy the like privilege. There was no need of re- 
quiring the ownership of real estate as a qualification, for, at 
that period, nearly all the permanent inhabitants of the Col- 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 17 

ony were freeholders. By an act passed in February, 
1723-4, the voter was required to possess real estate val- 
ued at £ 100, or that would rent for forty shillings per 
annum., or to be the eldest son of such a voter. In 1729, 
a law was passed, requiring that the freehold qualification 
should be of the value of JE 200, or £ 10 annual rent. Six- 
teen years afterwards, freemen were required to have free- 
holds of the value of £400, or £20 annual rent, "being 
their own real estate, or to be the eldest son of such a free- 
holder." In August, 1760, the value of the estate was re- 
quired to be at least £40, lawful money, or forty shillings 
rent. In 179S, it was established at $ 134, or seven dollars 
a year ; and at this rate it remained till the adoption of the 
nevi^ constitution, in 1843. 

"All these seeming inconsistencies," says Mr. Potter, " are 
easily explained by recurring to the history of the emission of 
paper money made by the Colonies. The qualifications of 
17-^3-4, 1729-30, and 1746, are in old tenor, so called, the 
value of which was constantly depreciating. The qualification 
of 1760 is in lawful money, and, in 1798, was merely changed 
into dollars, at six shillings to a dollar." 

The limitation of the right of suffrage to freeholders and 
the eldest sons of freeholders was but one of the grievances 
which produced the recent contest in Rhode Island. An- 
other cause of complaint was the inequality of representa- 
tion in the lower House of Assembly. The charter deter- 
mined the number of representatives of the several towns by 
an arbitrary ride, without reference to future increase of pop- 
ulation, or change of circumstances. The apportionment 
was probably correct in principle when it was adopted ; but 
being continued without change for one hundred and seventy 
years, it became very unequal. Newport, which was the 
chief town in 16G0, had four representatives ; Providence, 
then a place of small importance, had but two ; Warwick 
and Portsmouth had four each, and every other town two. 
But in 1824, the population of Providence was more than 
double that of Newport. Several towns which were enti- 
tled to only two representatives each, had twice as many in- 
habitants as Portsmouth, which sent four. The county of 
Providence, which included ten towns out of the thirty-one 
in the State, and had three fifths of the entire popula- 



18 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

tion, sent twenty-two representatives, while the other coun- 
ties sent fifty. The upper House of Assembly, consisting 
of the Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, and ten Senators, 
was chosen annually by "general ticket," and therefore 
equally represented the opinions of the majority of the vo- 
ters. 

The history of the several attempts to redress these griev- 
ances by a change in the fundamental laws of the State may 
be divided, for convenience, into three periods. The first 
extends from the adoption of the Federal Constitution by 
Rhode Island, in 1790, to the year 1824. The second, be- 
ginning in 1824, comes down to the publication of what was 
usually called the " Landholders' Constitution," in Febru- 
ary, 1842. The third period embraces the events which 
occurred subsequently to the date last mentioned, and ends 
with the establishment of the new government in May, 1843. 

During the first period, the people appeared satisfied with 
the existing form of government and the established laws, 
and no anxiety was expressed for a change. A motion was 
made in the House of Representatives, in 1799, to call a 
convention for the purpose of framing a constitution, one 
delegate to be allowed to every thousand inhabitants in a 
town. The motion prevailed by a small majority, but the 
bill was probably lost in the Senate, as we hear nothing of 
the project afterwards. In 1811, when there was an active 
political contest in the State, and the Democratic and Fed- 
eral parties successively obtained the control of the govern- 
ment during the same year, a bill was prepared for the ex- 
tension of suffrage, and it passed the Senate ; but it w-as de- 
feated in the other House, or was never presented there, and 
the scheme was not revived. In 1819, and the three fol- 
lowing years, Mr. Dorr affirms, that the subject of a new 
constitution was again agitated, with a view to removing the 
inequalities of suffrage and representation ; but we find no 
evidence of the fact, and the movement, therefore, could 
not have been a general one. 

During this period of more than thirty years, the people 
appeared to be well contented with their existing institutions. 
They were even strongly attached to the charter and the 
laws, that were now hallowed by so many old associations ; 
under which their ancestors had enjoyed the largest liberty, 
while nominally subject to a foreign monarch ; which had 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 19 

guided them through the storms of the Revolution, and made 
ihem members of tlie great federative republic ; which had 
kept their fathers' feet from stumbling, and had been a shield 
to them in their own years of infancy and childhood. The 
inequality in the representation of the towns was not yet 
very marked, and even where it was most apparent, it was 
not felt as a practical grievance. The towns were few in 
number, and the opposite extremities of this little State be- 
ing hardly fifty miles apart, a contrariety or even a division 
of interests could not exist between the several communi- 
ties inhabiting difierent portions of it, and unequal legis- 
lation was consequently impossible. The people were 
mostly engaged in agricultural pursuits, and owned the lands 
which they cultivated. A great majority of them, therefore, 
were freeholders, or belonged to families the heads of which 
were freeholders. The right of suffrage seemed to be in 
the proper hands, when it was vested in the owners of the 
soil and the heads of the families that formed the major part 
of the population. 

But during the second period, some remarkable changes 
took place in the character of the population, and corre- 
sponding alterations in the fundamental laws at last appeared 
inevitable. Manufactures were introduced, and the inhabi- 
tants of some towns, which enjoyed facilities for this branch 
of industry, increased with astonishing rapidity. A division 
of interests was created between the different portions of the 
State by this variety of employment, and the more populous 
towns, the growth of which had been fostered by the new 
direction of labor and capital, became uneasy at observing 
the advantage which their agricultural neighbours possessed 
in the control of the Assembly. A larger amount of capital, 
moreover, was vested in personal estate. Some men of 
large fortunes owned not a foot of ground, and, consequent- 
ly, had not the right to vote. It was very natural, that they 
should be jealous of the small farmers, who had now almost - 
the entire management of the politics of the State. Then 
a loose and shifting population, composed of laborers in 
search of employment, was introduced into some towns by 
the growth of manufactures, and though they had no hold 
upon the State, and could hardly be considered as perma- 
nent residents in it, they were unwilling to live without the 
political influence which they had enjoyed in their former 
homes. 



20 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

While such causes were at work to produce discontent 
with the existing laws, it is much to be regretted, that the 
freeholders did not soon perceive the necessity of granting 
a moderate extension of the right of suffrage. The consti- 
tution under the charter had worked well ; but a new state of 
things was growing up under it, and republican institutions 
must be flexible enough to adapt themselves to the changing 
circumstances of the times. Seasonable reforms prevent 
sweeping ones. " A froward retention of custom," says 
Lord Bacon, " is as turbulent a thing as an innovation. It 
were good, therefore, that men in their innovations would 
follow the example of time itself, which indeed innovateth 
greatly, but quietly, and by degrees scarce to be perceived." 
A reasonable and judicious reduction of the qualifications re- 
quired of a voter, if offered early in the period we are now 
considering, would have been satisfactory to the people, would 
have robbed the Suffrage party of any pretence or excuse for 
their illegal movements, and would have obviated the neces- 
sity of a more radical change, effected a few years later, 
amidst the tempests of a revolution. We do not say, that 
the Assembly should have made this concession as a matter 
of right. There was no right in the case, as will be here- 
after demonstrated. But reform had become expedient, 
and it was unwise to withstand it so long. The excuse for 
the dilatory action of the freemen is to be found in the re- 
pose and apparent indifference of the people of the State 
respecting the whole subject. Agitation on the topic was 
long deferred, but it came at last like a whirlwind, and had 
wellnigh made wreck of the government and the laws. A 
deceitful calm preceded the movement. Petitions on this 
matter to the Assembly were few and far between, and 
it was but seldom discussed in the public journals. But the 
demagogues were at work, and the day of contest was at 
hand. 

A convention was called by the General Assembly in 
1824, for the purpose of forming a written constitution. 
The delegates were chosen by the freemen, or qualified vo- 
ters. They came together in June, and completed their 
work in little more than a week. The constitution, which 
they devised, was adapted only to remedy the inequality in 
the representation of the towns, the qualifications for suffrage 
being retained as they were before, except that the right of 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 21 

voting was taken away from the eldest sons of the freehold- 
ers. A clause was proposed to allow those who were not 
landholders to vote ; but it was supported only by three del- 
egates, and therefore was not inserted in the draft of the 
constitution. The representation was made nearly equal, 
no town being allowed less than two, nor more than seven 
representatives, the number being varied between these lim- 
its according to the population. This constitution was sub- 
mitted to the qualified voters, and was rejected by a majority 
of more than fifteen hundred, owing chiefly, as was supposed, 
to the jealousy which tbe other towns entertained of the 
city of Providence, the influence of which in the Assembly 
would have been much increased, had the proposed instru- 
ment been adopted. The whole vote was a very small one, 
being less than five thousand, when the whole number of vo- 
ters in the State was at least eight thousand. This fact 
seems to show, that there was but little excitement on the 
subject, and that the people generally did not desire a 
change. 

The matter was not allowed to rest, however, and a new 
interest in it being awakened in the city of Providence, in 
1829, several petitions and memorials respecting an exten- 
sion of the right of suffrage were presented to the General 
Assembly. They were referred to a Committee, and, in 
the June session of that year, a very able report upon them 
was made, written, we believe, by the late Mr. Hazard. 
The question in respect both to right and policy was thor- 
oughly discussed, and it was strenuously denied, that the pro- 
posed change was either equitable or proper. This report 
was accepted, and the petitioners had leave to \yithdraw. 

We hear nothing more of any formal action on the subject 
till 1834, though the topic was discussed from time to time 
during the interval, especially by those citizens of Provi- 
dence who were not freeholders. Hitherto, the agitation 
had been entirely confined to this class of persons, the ex- 
pediency of a change finding but few advocates among the 
freemen. But several members of the bar now united them- 
selves to the party, improved its organization, and gave more 
method and respectability to its proceedings. Among these 
persons was Thomas W. Dorr, who was afterwards to act 
a very distinguished part in the matter. Under their guid- 
ance, the party determined to call a State convention, to 
3 



22 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

draw up the outlines of a constitution, lay ihem before the 
people, and then attempt to support them at the polls. The 
convention met, and recommended certain provisions in 
regard to the ratio of representation and the elective fran- 
chise. These were designed only to act upon public opinion, 
the whole proceedings being informal, as the convention was 
not authorized by the legal authorities. The desired effect 
was not produced, no decided impression being made upon 
the freeholders, and the party could never muster more than 
seven hundred votes out of eight thousand. In 1838, after 
a resolute struggle of four years, this " Constitutional party," 
as it was then termed, became extinct, after the members of 
it had given great moral power to the cause which they advo- 
cated, though they had produced hardly a perceptible effect 
on the opinions of the freemen. 

Meantime, the General Assembly viere not idle. They 
called another convention, in 1834, to amend the charter ; 
but when Mr. Dorr, who was then a member of the House, 
proposed as an amendment, that all resident inhabitants of 
the State, who had paid a tax on real or personal estate 
valued at ^ 134", should be allowed to vote in the choice of 
delegates, the proposition was defeated by a vote of fifty- 
eight to four. The convention met, but several towns were 
not represented in it, and the members who were present 
probably did not intend to accomplish any thing. Before the 
draft of a constitution was completed, the body adjourned 
for want of a quorum, and never came together again. 

No other decided movement was made till 1840. A very 
small minority in the House of Representatives made a mo- 
tion, from time to time, to amend the charter, or to extend 
the elective franchise ; but after very little debate, it was 
invariably voted down. Petitions on the subject were occa- 
sionally presented, but copies of them were not preserved, 
and it is, therefore, impossible to tell how numerous were 
tlie signers. It is not likely, that the number was great. 
The State was agitated by the discussion of national poli- 
tics, the subject of a tariff, or the choice of a President,— 
and the attention of the inhabitants was thus diverted from 
their local concerns. Many persons, who were in favor of 
an extension of suffrage, refused to manifest their opinions 
at the polls, lest they should disturb the organization or the 
movements of the national party to which they belonged. This 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 23 

reluctance to act showed that they felt no deep and abiding 
interest in the subject ; otherwise, they would not have been 
diverted from it by the contests of parties, the issue of which 
could not materially aftect their immediate interests. We 
repeat it, then, the restrictions on the elective franchise and 
the unequal representation of the towns were not felt as 
practical grievances. The operation of the laws was equal, 
taxes were moderate, justice was impartially administered, 
and no person had any direct cause of complaint. He might 
murmur because he was not allowed to govern others ; but 
he could not assert, that he was ill governed himself. He 
felt a more lively interest, therefore, in the contest between 
the friends of General Harrison and Mr. Van Buren, than 
in the amendment of the constitution of his own State. 

But after the great contest for the Presidency, in 1840, 
was ended, the agitation about the right of suffrage in Rhode 
Island revived at once, and almost immediately assumed 
a threatening aspect. A " Suffrage Association " was 
formed at Providence, composed mostly of persons who 
were not owners of real estate, and the whole machinery of 
discussion and turmoil was put in motion. Frequent meet- 
ings were held at the Town Hall, angry and exciting speech- 
es were delivered, badges denoting membership were worn 
in public, processions displaying banners and accompanied 
with music marched through the streets, and every artifice 
was used to swell their apparent numbers and terrify their 
opponents. A person ignorant of the history of the case 
might have supposed, that some new question had arisen, 
some wrong suddenly discovered, or injury lately done, in- 
stead of thinking that the whole excitement depended on a 
question quite as old as the first settlement of the Colony. 
Other associations, auxiliary to the parent body, were form- 
ed in different parts of the State ; and lecturers were sent 
from Providence to the several towns, to make addresses to 
the people, and kindle their passions in support of the cause. 
The party avowed their determination to form a new consti- 
tution and government, without the aid of the legislature or 
the other constituted authorities, and to suj)port their mea- 
sures by force, or by an appeal to the legal tribunals, on the 
ground that the people were sovereign, and had a right to 
act for themselves, without regard to usages or laws. 

Before we trace their proceedings further, it will be well 



24 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

to consider separately the action of the estabhshed government 
down to the end of the period with which we are now concern- 
ed. The General Assembly came together in January, 1841 , 
when petitions were presented to it, signed by less than six 
hundred persons, praying for the abrogation of the charter, 
an extension of the right of suffrage, and a more equal rep- 
resentation of the towns. This brought up the whole sub- 
ject for discussion, and it was finally resolved, that delegates 
should be chosen for a new convention, to be held at Prov- 
idence on the first Monday of November, 1841, with full 
powers to frame a new constitution. At the June session 
of the legislature, resolutions were adopted to allow the 
towns to be represented in the proposed convention by a 
number of delegates proportioned to their population, but 
restricting the choice of the delegates to the freemen, or 
qualified voters. 

The convention met at the appointed time, and on the 
question of sufiVage, at once decided to admit persons to 
vote who were not freeholders. But they found it difhcult to 
determine how large an amount of personal property should 
be considered as a qualification for the elective franchise, 
and they finally adjourned to February 14th, 1842, in order 
to ascertain more fully the wishes of their constituents on this 
important point. When they met again, they soon completed 
the draft of a constitution, which gave the right of suffrage to 
*' every white male native citizen of the United States," of 
the age of twenty-one years, who had resided in the State for 
two years, and in the town or city six months. In respect 
to the natives of foreign countries, who had been naturalized 
in the United States, the freehold qualification was retain- 
ed. The Representatives were distributed among the towns 
quite equitably on the basis of the population. To make 
the list of concessions complete, it was determined, both by 
the convention and the General Assembly, that " all per- 
sons who shall be qualified to vote under the provisions of 
[this] Constitution, shall be qualified to vote upon the ques- 
tion of the adoption of said Constitution." It was to be 
submitted to the people, for ratification or rejection, on the 
21st, 22d, and 23d days of March, 1842. 

It must be admitted, that this instrument, commonly called 
the " Landholders' Constitution," was as bountiful a con- 
cession to popular rights as any party could reasonably de- 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 25 

sire, and that it established a frame of government as liberal 
as any which existed in any State in the union. ]n respect 
to tiie elective franchise, the ratio of representation, and the 
mode proposed for its adoption, it granted all that had been 
claimed by any party or individual, down to the commence- 
ment of 1840. Its adoption would have remedied all ex- 
isting difficulties, and would have insured the peace and 
prosperity of the State for a long period to come. 

We retiu-n to the history of the proceedings of the Suf- 
frage associations during the year 1841. On the 5th of 
May, they held at Newport what is called, in the political 
jargon of the day, a "mass" convention, — meaning, we 
suppose, a meeting of the " masses " of the people. How 
many were present at it, we are not informed ; but those who 
did come passed many resolutions, and made many speech- 
es, but adopted no definitive measures. They held an ad- 
journed meeting at Providence, on the 5th of July, when 
they resolved by their own sovereign authority, without any 
sanction of law or usage, and without having been even nom- 
inally appointed or delegated by the towns to perform such 
an act, " that a convention of the people at large should be 
called for the formation of a republican constitution." They 
recommended, that all the towns should choose delegates, in 
the proportion of one to every thousand inhabitants, to meet 
at Providence on the 4th of October, " for the purpose afore- 
said."* Meetings were held, in pursuance of this notice, " in 
nearly all the towns of the State," of course, without any 
legal formalities, any person taking a part in them, and cast- 
ing a vote, who saw fit. The whole number of these nom- 
inal votes is not known, there being no record of the pro- 
ceedings ; but it was said to be about 7,000, the whole 
population of the State being rather more than 108,000. 
" A large majority " of the delegates thus chosen met in 
convention, and after one adjournment, completed the draft 
of a constitution, which they determined to submit " to the 
people " for adoption on the 27th, 28th, and 29th days of 
December. The convention likewise assumed the power 
to determine who should be allowed to vote for or against 
their constitution. The voters were required to be Ameri- 

* We are indebted for most of these facts and citations to " Governor 
Dorr's inaugural message to bis legislature, on the 5th of May, 1842." 

3* 



26 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

can citizens, twenty-one years of age, and having their dom- 
icile in the State, '•'■ but without any hmitation of sex, color, 
place of nativity, or any fixed period of residence whatev- 
er."* Of course, no fault could be found with such a right 
of suffrage on the score of illiberality. 

In the constitution itself, which was commonly called the 
" People's Constitution," the elective franchise was a little 
more restricted. The right of voting \vas given to "every 
white male citizen of the United States, of the age of twenty- 
one years, who has resided in this State for one year, and 
in the town where he votes six months." With the excep- 
tion of requiring one year's residence, instead of two, and 
admitting naturalized citizens to vote without a freehold 
qualification, this provision coincided with the corresponding 
one in the " Landholder's Constitution." These two ex- 
ceptions are evidently of slight importance, and in nearly 
every other important particular, the two instruments were 
alike. Open meetings were to be held in the several towns, 
on the three specified days in December, to receive the 
votes of those who came personally to accept or reject the 
" People's Constitution " ; and those who, '■'■from sickness 
or other causes^ may be unable to attend and vote," were 
requested to write their names on the back of a ticket, cause 
it to be certified by the signature of another person, and 
send it to the meeting on either of the three days next suc- 
ceeding the three days already mentioned. The business of 
receiving votes was extended in this anomalous way through 
a whole week. 

During the first three days, about 9,000 votes w^ere col- 
lected from the hands of the voters themselves, though with 
how much caution the pretensions of such voters were scru- 
tinized in these informal and illegal meetings, we are left to 
imagine. During the remaining three days, through the 
privilege of going about to the citizens' houses and obtaining 
their votes, the names of about 5,000 more were handed in, 
making an aggregate of 14,000. As the adult white male 
population of the State was supposed to be about 22,000, 
the friends of extended suffrage at once declared, that their 
constitution was supported by the votes of more than three 
fifths of the people. That the grossest frauds were practis- 

* Potter's ConsidercUions on the Rhode Island Question, p. 19. 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 27 

ed in order to obtain this nominal majority cannot be doubt- 
ed, whether we consider the extravagant and unprecedented 
character of the plan for obtaining and counting the votes, 
the entire absence of legal guards and checks, and the 
fact that, on subsequent trials, under an elective franchise 
equally liberal, when the party used every effort to bring 
out their entire strength, for the undisputed control of the 
State was the prize at issue, they were never able to muster 
much more than half of the number which they claimed on 
this occasion. There was a show of fairness at the time, 
caused by offering all their votes, each of vi'hich was indors- 
ed with tlie name of the person presenting it, for examination 
to the General Assembly ; but that body, of course, took no 
notice of the proposal, as it did not recognize the legality of 
any part of the proceedings. " The People's convention," 
also, authorized the secretaries to copy the registry of the 
voters or the votes themselves, for the use of any person who 
applied for them. But when individuals began to take ad- 
vantage of this permission, the " Sufl'rage Association " of 
Providence actually undertook to overrule the order of the 
convention, countermanded this authority, and prevented the 
issue of any more copies. 

To give some idea of the gross character of the frauds 
which were practised, we extract a passage from Mr. Pot- 
ter's pamphlet. 

" In the town of Newport, they have long been charged 
with committing the greatest frauds, and the reason they have 
never attempted to disprove these charges is, probably, because 
they could not be refuted. They claimed to have obtained 1,207 
votes for the people's constitution, of whom they say 317 were 
freemen. 

"In making up the whole number of 1,207, they took the 
names of the soldiers at the United States fort, of the people at 
work for the government at Fort Adams, and of people who 
had been, for a long time, gone to sea, or absent from the State. 
And, from an actual and careful examination of the list of their 
voters, it is estimated by a person, who is probably better qualified 
to judge than any other man in that town, that not more than 
750, at most, out of the 1,207, were qualified to vote even upon 
the very liberal terms of the people's constitution, which admitted 
foreigners to vote for it, and required no specific period of resi- 
dence. And when, only three months afterwards, in March, 
1842, the vote was taken upon the legal constitution, and every 



28 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

person, who had resided in the State two years, was admitted to 
vote, and only foreigners and the transient population excluded, 
the people's party, notwithstanding they brought every man to 
the polls, could only obtain 361 votes against it. Here is a fall- 
ing off from 1,207, when they took the vote in their own way^ 
to 361, when it was taken in legal town meeting, where the votes 
were challenged, and the transient population excluded. And 
both parties together, at this same town meeting, could only ob- 
tain 1,091 voles, while the people's party claimed to have ob- 
tained for theirs, 1,207 votes. 

"Again : they claim to have obtained, in Newport, 317 free- 
men for the people's constitution. The same gentleman, before 
referred to, who personally knows almost every freernan in the 
town, estimates that, at least, ninety of these were no freemen 
at all. And, of the others, a great number voted merely as an 
expression of opinion, and some for party purposes. How else, 
if there was no fraud, can it be accounted for, that, in the legal 
town meeting, where the very same freemen voted, subject, how- 
ever, to a legal scrutiny, this vote fell off from 317 to 102, and 
that both parties together could only obtain 475. At the town 
meeting in December, the people's party had all their own way. 
The other was conducted according to law, although the same 
people voted, and every effort was made on both sides. 

" Such frauds as these would be most likely to be committed in 
the cities and large manufacturing towns, such as Newport, Pro- 
vidence, Smithfield, Cumberland, Warwick, &c. In a great 
many of the country towns, the vote was probably very fairly 
conducted." — pp. 58,59. 

We have now come to the third period that we indicated, 
and the whole State seems to present " the confusion of 
king Agramant's camp." There are the government and 
the General Assembly, legally organized under the charter, 
exercising an authority which had not before been questioned 
for two hundred years, and firmly supported, for the time 
being, by the whole body of the freeholders, and a large por- 
tion of the other well informed and respectable inhabitants. 
There is the " People's Constitution," alleged to be sanc- 
tioned and adopted by a great majority of the entire popula- 
tion, and only waiting the short time appointed by its friends 
to be put in operation, and to claim absolute sovereignty in 
the State. There is the " Landholders' Constitution," 
abiding a verdict of approval or rejection, to be rendered in 
a few weeks by the whole body of voters empowered to act 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 29 

under its provisions. If the true issue could have been pre- 
sented at this time between the friends and the opponents of 
the illegal measures adopted by the Suffrage party, there is 
no question that this " Landholders' Constitution " would 
have been adopted by a considerable majority. But unluck- 
ily, many of the freeholders were so fanatically attached to 
the charter, that they resisted every attempt to place the 
government upon a new basis ; and when the day of voting 
came, they either stayed away from the polls, or threw their 
votes against the new constitution, without reflecting, that 
such conduct in fact strengthened the hands of their greatest 
opponents. The Suffrage party, also, exerted themselves 
strenuously against it, and the consequence was, that the new 
instrument was defeated, though by a small majority. The 
numbers were 8,689 to 8,013. At least one thousand free- 
holders voted against it, for the reason we have just stated, 
and this number, being deducted from the larger vote, re- 
duces it to a minority ; and thus it is conclusively shown, 
even without reckoning the freemen who stayed away from the 
polls on the same grounds which induced many of their fel- 
lows to cast a negative vote, that the major part of the peo- 
ple, reckoned under a most liberal elective franchise, were 
opposed to what was facetiously denominated the " People's 
Constitution." 

The result of this trial also established another curious 
fact ; that the same party which boasted of obtaining a vote 
of 14,000 in December, when there were no checks or 
legal restrictions established at their informal assemblies, and 
consequently every person who pleased voted for himself or 
brought in a vote by proxy, when they came to another trial, 
only three months afterwards, under a law nearly or quite as 
liberal in determining the qualifications of the voters, but 
guarded by proper formalities, could not muster but about 
7,000 votes. And we may mention here, that at several 
subsequent elections, when the same faction exerted their 
whole strength, they could throw but little more than 7,000 
votes, which is about one third of what might be cast in the 
State under the present liberal constitution. It is now de- 
monstrated, therefore, — what was believed from the out- 
set, — that the friends of the soidisant " People's Constitu- 
tion " never constituted more than one third of the people 
of the State. 



30 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

The legal government was now still in the hands of the 
authorities established under the charter, and it was blindly 
and furiously opposed by a faction, that had just rejected a 
constitution granting all that they had at first asked, and who 
were now determined to establish by force an instrument of 
their own making, confessedly formed, " not only without 
the law, but against the law." Their conduct was as vio- 
lent as their principles were unfounded and absurd. Flags 
were hung up in the streets of Providence and other places, 
bearing the motto, " The constitution is established, and it 
must be maintained." Meetings were held, and exciting 
speeches made, denouncing the government and the laws, 
and exhorting the members of the party to be ready with 
arms in their hands for a bloody contest in support of their 
principles. The flame was now fanned by the efforts of 
politicians in other States, eager to turn this excitement to 
their own advantage, and careless about the issue of a con- 
flagration which seemed too distant to menace the buildings 
that sheltered them. The agitation was at its height. 
Families were divided, and brothers, fathers, and sons were 
arrayed on opposite sides. In short, a revolution was in 
progress ; and for what ? Because the insurgent party re- 
fused to accept, in legal form, from the hands of the con- 
stituted authorities, all that they demanded as their due ; but 
were resolved to establish their claims in their own right, or 
by their own authority ; and, if necessary, to vindicate their 
pretensions by an armed force, and all the atrocities of "a 
civil war. 

The alarm was now general throughout the State, though 
the focus of agitation was in Providence, where the oppo- 
nents of die government mustered in greatest force, and 
were supported by deputations from the laboring population 
of the manufacturing villages in the neighbourhood, and along 
the course of the Blackstone. In the agricultural towns, 
the people, who were chiefly small farmers, were tranquil, 
and were strongly attached to the existing government. 
But they had friends and relatives In the city, and they knew 
not what might be the issue of the struggle, or how soon they 
might be subjected to a government created by a faction, 
and established by violence. The General Assembly was 
firm, and, at an extra session called in March, taking into 
view the resolutions already passed by the Suffrage party. 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 31 

" That they will support their Constitution by all necessary 
means, and repel force by force," empowered the Governor 
to issue a proclamation, warning all good citizens against 
these illegal proceedings ; and they authorized him " to adopt 
such measures as in his opinion may be necessary, during the 
recess of the legislature, to execute the laws, and preserve 
the State against domestic violence." They also passed the 
law called, in the vulgar phrase of their opponents, the 
" Algerine Act," making it a high offence, punishable by 
fine and imprisonment, for any persons to act as officers in 
illegal town meetings, called for pretended elections, or to 
signify that they would accept office under such elections ; 
and declaring further, that if any persons should attempt to 
exercise any legislative, executive, or ministerial functions of 
office in the State, by virtue of such pretended elections, or 
should assemble for the purpose of exercising such functions, 
they should be deemed guilty of treason, and be punished by 
imprisonment for life. It was also provided in the act, that 
the trials might be held in any part of the State, without re- 
gard to the county wherein the offence was committed. 

Notwithstanding the terrors of this law, elections under 
the " People's Constitution " were held at the appointed 
time, on the 18th of April, in every town in the State, under 
such forms as the party saw fit to observe. It was rather 
difficult to find persons willing to serve, as many declined 
the dangerous honor. But the vacancies on the nomination 
list were filled as fast as they were created, and eventually, 
Thomas W. Dorr was chosen governor, all the executive 
offices were filled, a full Senate was chosen, and the great 
part of a House of Representatives. Less than 6,500 votes 
were cast on this occasion ; while, at an ordinary election 
under the charter, a year or two before, more than 8,000 
freemen voted. Which party, then, had the majority .'' 
About the same time, the legal elections took place, and the 
Whigs and Democrats of Rhode Island, forgetting their old 
disputes at this crisis, united under the name of the " Law 
and Order Parly," chose Samuel W. King, Esq., governor, 
and filled the other offices about equally from their respec- 
tive ranks. Thus, two sets of officers were chosen in the 
State, both bound to begin the exercise of their functions at 
the appointed time in May, their adherents being pledged to 
support them by all necessary means. 



32 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

The Governor, thinking the crisis contemplated by the 
legislature had now arrived, made a formal requisition on the 
President of the United States for assistance, under that 
provision of the Federal Constitution which requires the na- 
tional government to render aid to any State that is threat- 
ened with domestic violence. With the unanimous advice 
and consent of his cabinet, the President replied, in a firm 
but conciliatory tone, promising the required aid whenever 
any overt act of violence should be committed. We give 
the following extract from his letter to Governor King, dated 
April Uth, 1842. 

"I have to assure your Excellency, that, should the time ar- 
rive, (and my fervent prayer is, that it may never dome,) when 
an insurrection shall exist against the government of Rhode Isl- 
and, and a requisition shall be made upon the Executive of the 
United States to furnish that protection which is guarantied to 
each State by the Constitution and laws, I shall not he found to 
shrink from the performance of a duty lohich, ivhile it would be 
the most painful, is at the same time the most imperative. I have 
also to say, that, in such a contingency, the Executive could not 
look into real or supposed defects of the existing government, in 
order to ascertain whether some other plan of government pro- 
posed for adoption was better suited to the wants, and more in 
accordance with the wishes of any portion of her citizens. To 
throw the executive power of this government into any such 
controversy would be to make the President the armed arbitrator 
between the people of the different States and their constituted 
authorities, and might lead to an usurped power, dangerous alike 
to the stability of the State governments and the liberties of the 
people. 

" It will be my duty, on the contrary, to respect the requisitions 
of that government ivhich has been recognized as the existing gov- 
ernment of the State through all time past, until I shall be advised, 
in regular manner, that it has been altered and abolished, and 
another substituted in its place, by legal and peaceable proceed- 
ings, adopted and pursued by the authorities and people of the 
Staler 

Unappalled by this firm language, or by the union in opin- 
ion and action of the established authorities of the State and 
the whole nation against them, the misguided adherents of 
the Suffrage party continued their preparations for the con- 
test. So menacing was their attitude, that another extra ses- 
sion of the General Assembly was called at Providence, on 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 33 

the 25th of April, to make further provision for the emer- 
gency. A firm determination was manifested by this body 
to support the government, but as a new legislature was to 
meet in little more than a week at Newport, nothing was 
done at this session, which lasted only two days, except to au- 
thorize the Governor to take measures to protect the public 
property and to fill vacancies in the militia. The friends of 
law began now to prepare for defence. Arms and ammuni- 
tion were obtained, disaffected companies were disbanded, 
volunteers were enrolled, men of all ages and occupations 
entered the ranks, frequent drills were held, and the city 
wore almost the appearance of a camp. Still, many per- 
sons hesitated, and the preparations were very incomplete. 
Some doubted whether the insurgents would dare to pro- 
ceed to extremities ; some wished to remain neutral in the 
hour of peril, and then to swell the host of the victors ; and 
each desired that its opponent should be the first to strike a 
blow\ 

The 3d of May arrived, and the officers chosen under the 
" People's Constitution " assembled at Providence, to or- 
ganize their government. They could not obtain possession 
of the State House, but they borrowed for the occasion an 
unfinished wooden building, of small pretensions in point of 
architecture, that had been intended for a foundery. A pro- 
cession was formed, consisting of the executive officers and 
the legislature, with their adherents, and, under a military 
escort, it marched to this place of assembly. The guard was 
composed of five hundred men, armed with muskets and ball 
cartridges, and more than a thousand unarmed persons joined 
the ranks. The military mounted guard round the building 
during the hours of session, escorted the " Governor " to 
and from the place of meeting, and kept watch at his house 
during the night. Mr. Dorr delivered a formal message to 
his " Senators and Representatives," and the usual formal- 
ities of legislative meetings were observed, as far as the 
knowledge and experience of the parties would permit. 

The " Governor " earnestly advised his party to adopt 
active measures at once to seize the State House and other 
public property ; but a majority of his legislature refused to 
take such a decisive step, and he has since bitterly complained 
of their vacillation and timidity at this time, which ruined 
the cause. His advice was certainly judicious, and if the 
4 



34 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

party had supported him with courage, they might have tri- 
umphed. The time for caution and dehberation had passed. 
By the terms of the " Algerine Act," they had all com- 
mitted an overt act of treason, and the only proper alterna- 
tive now was to go forward and fight, or to disband and 
submit to the penalties of the law. The friends of the 
legal government had not completed their preparations ; 
they were almost stupefied at the audacity of the insurgents ; 
and, as peaceable citizens, who had never before been called 
out of the quiet walks of life, they shrunk from a contest 
with desperate men, who had nothing to lose but their lives. 
They, also, are justly exposed to the charge of remissness 
and indecision at this crisis. Half a dozen of the ordinary 
minions of the law, armed only with a common warrant from 
a justice of the peace, we believe, might have arrested half 
of Dorr's " Assembly." A large portion of the insurgent 
troops had a greater dread of a constable than of a musket, 
and though they might have stood to their arms against a 
military force, they would probably have fled at the sight of 
a warrant. 

But the proper hour for action was missed by both parties, 
and the contest was therefore protracted. The usurping 
legislature passed a few insignificant resolutions, made a show 
of repealing the " Algerine Act," and then, after a session 
of only two days, adjourned to July 5th. Meanwhile, the 
General Assembly elected by the freemen came together at 
Newport, May 4th, to organize the legal government for the 
ensuing year. Roused by the insulting conduct of the Suf- 
frage faction, they determined to vindicate the dignity of the 
State, and to support the authority of the law, by vigorous 
measures. Another requisition for aid was sent to the Pres- 
ident of the United States by their authority, the former one 
having been issued by the Governor alone. President Ty- 
ler answered as before, that assistance should be given as 
soon as any act of open violence should be committed ; and 
the pledge was soon partially redeemed by sending two or 
three companies of United States troops to Newport, with 
orders, as it was understood, as soon as a blow was struck, 
to take an active part on the side of the legal government. 
Two members of Dorr's legislature from Newport were ar- 
rested immediately on their return to that city, on a charge 
of treason. Many other arrests were made at Providence, 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 35 

on the same charge, of persons who had assumed legislative 
or executive functions. Great commotion ensued, and 
crowds of people attended the accused to the place of ex- 
amination ; but only one attempt at a rescue was made, and 
that was stopped by the prudence of the person in custody. 
Dorr himself was surrounded by armed adherents, and, as 
it was supposed that an attempt to seize his person would 
lead to the shedding of blood, he was allowed to remain at 
liberty. He soon left the city, to seek for aid and counte- 
nance in New York and Washington. 

The turmoil at Providence seemed to increase, and near- 
ly all business was suspended. The most violent threats 
were uttered by the insurgent party, and the newspapers in 
their interest published the names of all the magistrates and 
other officers, who were active in making arrests, and men- 
tioned their places of residence, with a hand pointing to- 
wards them, as if to guide the mob and the torch to their 
doors.* Governor King returned from Newport to Provi- 
dence, and was escorted into the city by about three hun- 
dred soldiers, and six hundred citizens without arms. Ac- 
tive military preparations were continued on both sides. On 
the 16th of May, Dorr returned from New York, where he 
had made speeches to large assemblies of the populace, had 
received the gift of a sword, and had prepared a bombastic 
proclamation for the inhabitants of Rhode Island, prom- 
ising to make their State the battle ground of American 
liberty. He entered Providence in a barouche drawn by 
four white horses, attended by nearly twelve hundred men, of 
whom two hundred and fifty were under arms. He took up 
his quarters at the house of Burrington Anthony, at Federal 
Hill, on the outskirts of the city, and was there guarded by 
his troops. His intention was openly avowed to seize the 
public property by force of arms, and emissaries were sent 
to bring in his armed adherents from the country, to swell 
the number of the forces. Probably three or four hundred 
were in this way collected, with two small field pieces ; and, 
by some unaccountable negligence on the side of the govern- 

* " In recommending the massacre of all aristocrats, he [Marat] scrupled 
not to proclaim through his paper, tiie ' Jimi du Ftvple,' that y7(),()0() heads 
must fall by the guillotine: and he pi'hl/s/ied lii^ts oj ptrsons whom he con- 
signed to the pnpvlar vengeance and destruction hy their names, description, 
and places of residence." Brougham's Stutfsmen, 3d series, p. 107. 



36 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

ment party, a company of them were allowed to come down 
into the city on the afternoon of Tuesday the 17th, and car- 
ry off, without resistance, two brass six pounders from one of 
the armories. 

Meanwhile, the friends of the government were not idle. 
The citizens of Providence were requested to prepare for 
the defence of the city, and arms were furnished them for 
the purpose. The shops were closed, the business at the col- 
lege was suspended. Professors and students, judges who 
had grown gray on the bench, and old men who had never 
before shouldered a musket, joined the ranks, and submitted 
to the drill. Guards were stationed at proper places, and 
patrols were established for the streets at night. Infor- 
mation being received, that the Arsenal, where a large quan- 
tity of arms and ammunition was stored, was to be the first 
object of attack, a company of infantry and one of artillery 
were stationed there, in addition to the ordinary guard of 
thirty men, and a number of volimteers. A steamboat was 
despatched to Warren, Bristol, and Newport, to bring in 
the troops from those places. 

During the evening, about a hundred armed men from 
Woonsocket and other towns joined Dorr, and, before mid- 
night, his force was increased to three or four hundred. At 
one o'clock on the morning of the 18th, two signal guns 
were fired from his quarters, as if to inform his enemies 
as well as his friends, that the attack was to be made. The 
bells of Providence instantly lolled the alarm, according to 
the preconcerted plan, three strokes from one being followed 
by three strokes from another, and so on, round the city. 
The citizens flocked to the alarm posts, and among them 
were seen the aged father, the uncle, and the brothers-in- 
law of the leader of the insurgents. Parties were sent out 
to strengthen the guard at the Arsenal, but the troops of Dorr 
were on the ground before them. With two hundred and 
fifty soldiers, and two pieces of artillery, he marched to at- 
tack this strong building, situated on an open plain about a 
mile and a half out of the city, surrounded by stone walls, 
and protected by at least an equal number of armed men, 
and five cannon. Passing round the city, and not through 
it, the insurgents arrived there some hours before daybreak, 
and sent a message requiring the garrison to surrender. The 
commander, Colonel Blodgett, returned a contemptuous re- 



The. Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 37 

fusal, and the artillery of the insurgents being then brought 
to the front, Dorr ordered his men to fire. Tlie match was 
apphed, but only the priming powder flashed, for some more 
prudent friend of the cause, without the knowledge of his 
fellows, had drawn the charge, and plugged the pieces. The 
men within the Arsenal waited for the first discharge before 
opening their own fire, which, from the ex|)osed position of 
their opponents, must have been very destructive. But not 
a shot came, and it soon appeared, that the courage of the 
rebels had failed, and that parties of them were already re- 
tiring from the field without waiting for orders. The rein- 
forcements from the city were advancing, and as the night 
was very dark, a heavy fog hanging over the river and the 
plain, hostile companies, not distinguishable by any pecu- 
liarity of dress or equipment, passed each other unchalleng- 
ed. " The officer first in command under me," says Dorr, 
" had disappeared, and he was followed by others. Delay 
occurred in altering the position of the pieces." Most of 
the soldiers having retired, " I directed the pieces to be 
withdrawn, and left the ground at daylight with thirty-five or 
forty men. None remained behind after we had retired." 

At daylight, the Mayor issued a notice, requiring the citi- 
zens to close their places of business during the day, and to 
meet at their alarm posts, at half past seven o'clock. The 
steamboat arrived at seven, bringing in the companies from 
Newport and the other towns. Five hundred soldiers, with 
six field-pieces, were then placed under the command of 
Colonel Blodgett, accompanied by Governor King, and 
moved towards Federal Hill, with the determination to ar- 
rest Dorr. Most of the insurgents had dispersed ; but thirty 
or forty desperate men, half intoxicated, remained ; and 
they loaded to the muzzle two pieces of cannon, which they 
still possessed, brought them forward so as to command the 
street by which the troops were to ascend to Dorr's head- 
quarters, and stood by them with lighted matches, prepared 
to fire. Colonel Blodgett ordered a detachment to go round 
to their rear, and then, with the main body of his men, 
marched steadily up the street. The insurgents dared not 
fire, but gradually drew back with their cannon, till the troops 
came up to Anthony's house, which Governor King, with a 
company of soldiers, entered and searched, but without suc- 
cess. Dorr had gone off about two hours before. A num- 
4* 



38 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

ber of men on horseback were instantly sent in pursuit, but 
he had the start of them, and was soon in safety beyond the 
limits of the State. The small party, who still held the two 
cannon, were then required to surrender. They refused, and 
the word was about to be given to fire upon them, when one 
of their leaders came forward, and said he had lost all com- 
mand over them, for they were drunk and reckless : but if 
left to themselves, they would soon give up the cannon and 
disperse. Willing to avoid the efilision of blood, Governor 
King drew off the troops. The cannon were soon return- 
ed, and the last of the insurgents disappeared. 

The detestable character of this revolt, and the prompt 
manner in which it was repressed by the government, had their 
proper effect on many of the misguided persons, who had hith- 
erto been active in the party of the insurgents. On the 
morning of the 18th, most of the members of Dorr's legis- 
lature from the city of Providence resigned their offices, and 
published a handbill reprobating in the strongest terms the 
late violent proceedings, and in fact denouncing their for- 
mer leader. Their example was soon followed by most of 
the soidisanl executive officers and legislators appointed from 
the other towns. Dorr was now left almost alone among 
the former leaders of the party, and, the " government " 
created under him having in fact dissolved itself, one would 
suppose, that neither pretence, means, nor inclination re- 
mained to him for continuing the revolt. But the dogged 
resoluteness of his character was opposed to any sign of sub- 
mission, and his vanity being elated by the praises heaped 
upon him in some assemblages of the ignorant populace in 
the other States, he persevered in the attempt with a deter- 
mination that savored of insanity. Little effort on his part 
was needed to keep up the excitement among the unthinking 
and uneducated classes, whose passions had first been roused 
by false statements and heated declamation, and whose ardor 
was now sustained and even increased by the electric influen- 
ces of a revolutionary contest. It is easy, under such cir- 
cumstances, to stir the passions of a multitude to madness, 
but a mighty power is required in order to direct or allay 
the storm. 

The agitation that prevailed, the threatening language that 
was still used, and occasional rumors of insurgent gatherings 
in different parts of the State did not permit the legal author- 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 39 

ities lo relax in their vigilance, nor the inhabitants to feel 
secure, till Dorr should be apprehended, or a more signal 
blow be struck. The Governor issued his proclamation, of- 
fering a reward of one thousand dollars for the arrest and de- 
livery of this fugitive from justice ; and this ofler was sub- 
sequently, by order of the General Assembly, increased to 
five thousand ; but without effect. He was known to be 
lurking somewhere on the borders of the State, concerting 
measures with his adherents for another outbreak ; but his 
movements and policy were too well concealed to admit of 
the discovery or seizure of his person. The military organ- 
ization of the State, therefore, was still kept up, and a sick- 
ening uncertainty and suspense rested on people's minds. 
Business had long been at a stand, and the aspect of affairs 
was gloomy. No clue could be obtained to the secret 
movements of the insurgents, but report magnified their num- 
bers and means, and stories were current respecting great 
promises of aid to them from the populace of New York and 
other cities. That such stories were not entirely without 
foundation appears from the violent and incendiary character 
of the speeches made by some of the street orators in these 
cities, about this period. " You stand here idle," said one 
to a large assemblage in State Street, Boston, " you stand 
here idle, while those aristocrats in Rhode Island are pour- 
ing out the blood of your brethren like water upon the pave- 
ment." In respect either to the falsity of the charge, or to 
the fiendlike nature of the only purpose with which it could 
have been uttered, a parallel to this speech can be found 
only in the detestable ravings of Danton or Marat. 

Incidents occurred, from time to time, that showed the 
continued, though secret, activity of the hostile party, and 
that preparations were making for another struggle. There 
were indications of a general movement in the northern parts 
of the State, and especially in the city and county of Prov- 
idence, where the faction had always been most numerous 
and violent. Bands of armed men appeared suddenly in 
Woonsocket, North Providence, Cumberland, Gloucester, 
and other places, and gieat pains were taken to collect arms 
and munitions of war. A party of them, about fifty in num- 
ber, made an attempt, one dark and stormy night, to get 
possession of some cannon in the hands of an artillery com- 
pany, about nine miles distant from Providence, having pro- 



40 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

vided themselves with four horses in order to carry the pieces 
off. In the darkness, they missed the place where the can- 
non were deposited, and broke open two other buildings. 
By this time, the guard had alarmed the town, and there 
were soon two hundred and fifty armed men in the streets. 
But the marauders succeeded in making iheir escape, though 
without having effected their object. A {ew days afterwards, 
a powder magazine in the neighbourhood of the city was dis- 
covered to have been broken open, and about twelve hun- 
dred pounds of gunpowder carried off. It was easy to 
perceive the motive of this class of thefts, the end being 
quite as -patriotic^ as the means were honorable. 

At last, about the 20th of June, news arrived, that the 
insurgents were assembling in great force at Chepachet, a 
considerable village of the town of Gloucester, near the Con- 
necticut line ; that they had taken possession of an eminence 
there, called Acote's hill, and were fortifying it by throwing 
up entrenchments. Field-works were thrown up on two sides 
of the summit, with wide spaces for the cannon,^ of which 
there were seven pieces. The first accounts were, that sev- 
en or eight hundred men had come together, that many others 
were on their way to join them, and that they were all well 
supplied with arms and ammunition. To the major part of 
the people of Rhode Island, weary of repeated alarms and 
reports of treasonable machinations, this information of the 
renewal of the contest brought rather a feeling of relief than 
of terror or discouragement. Now that the insurrection had 
come to a head, by a vigorous effort it might be crushed, 
and it would no longer be necessary 

" Against the undlvulged pretence to fight 
Of treasonous maHce." 

Their spirits and courage were high, strengthened, as they 
were, by the recollection of former success, and by a con- 
viction of the justice of their cause ; and when the call was 
sounded, they rallied to the support of the government with 
a quickness and energy, that promised a speedy termination 
of the contest. The General Assembly passed an act, 
placing the whole State under martial law. Volunteers were 
called for, and more than a thousand citizens of Providence 
enrolled themselves in a single day. All places of business 
were closed, and men of all ages, ranks, and professions 
again assumed the duties of common soldiers. Providence, 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 41 

Warren, Bristol, and Newport had the appearance of so 
many camps, the citizens remaining almost constantly under 
arms, and devoting day and night to military exercises. 
Steamboats were despatched down the Bay to bring together 
the troops, and by the evening of the 26th, more than three 
thousand were collected in Providence, well supplied with 
arms, and others were constantly coming in. Thirteen 
pieces of ordnance were provided, and the government 
stores of ammunition were ample. General McNeil was 
appointed to the chief command, and he was assisted by 
many gentlemen capable of rendering efficient aid both in 
council and in action.- 

Dorr joined the camp of the insurgents on the 25th, and 
immediateiy issued a proclamation, requiring his " General 
Assembly," which had been adjourned to meet at Provi- 
dence, to come together at Gloucester ; that is, into the 
midst of his forces ; and he requested those towns in which 
vacancies had occurred by resignation, to proceed forthwith 
to fill them by new elections. This last clause was a very 
necessary one, for there were hardly half a dozen members 
of his legislature who had not resigned. He also issued 
" General Orders," countersigned by his " Adjutant-Gen- 
eral," requiring " the military of this State," who were in 
favor of the " People's Constitution," to repair forthwith to 
his head-quarters, and requesting all volunteers to do the 
same. But even those newspapers in Providence, which 
had hitherto advocated his cause, refused to publish these 
orders, and they could be printed only in New York. Many 
of his former friends in Providence, also, as Dorr himself 
declares, " were led to renounce and denounce our pro- 
ceedings, as no longer to be ' tolerated ' ; and they sub- 
scribed a paper to this effect." In truth, the utmost efforts 
of the more violent members of the insurgent party could 
not bring together more than a very paltry force at Che- 
pachet ; and, if their weakness had been known, a great 
part of the labor of preparation for putting down the rebel- 
lion might have been spared. But it was impossible to ob- 
tain information that could be relied upon. Their leader 
affirms, that on the 27th, they had but two hundred and twen- 
ty-five men under arms, although " a much larger number 
of persons came and went as spectators, some of whom may 
have been set down as a part of the military." They had 



42 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

seven pieces of artillery, and more muskets than they could 
use. It was men that they needed. Dorr himself remarks, 
with infinite simplicity and astonishment, that " the people 
were called, and they did not come." 

The first act of hostility was committed by the insurgents. 
A party of four persons, who went out from Providence to 
obtain information respecting the movements of the rebels, 
were met by a detachment from Dorr's camp, and taken 
prisoners. " They were disarmed, robbed, and bound, and 
marched off twelve miles on foot to Woonsocket." A 
movement of a mob of " sympathizers " from another 
State led to the only loss of life, that occurred during the 
contest. On the 27th, a crowd of persons collected in 
Pawtucket, Massachusetts, apparently determined to cross 
the bridge and enter Rhode Island. The government had 
posted a company of soldiers to keep guard at the Rhode 
Island end of the bridge. In the evening, the mob began to 
press on ; they assailed the guard with brickbats and other 
missiles, and wounded one or more. They were ordered to 
disperse, and when they would not obey, a volley of mus- 
ketry was fired over their heads. Still they persisted, and 
the order to fire was given, and, being obeyed, one man 
was killed, and probably one or two others were slightly 
wounded. 

The organization of the government forces being com- 
pleted on the 27th, General McNeil prepared to march 
against the insurgents ; and, with that purpose, ordered a 
considerable detachment to go round into their rear, so as to 
cut off their retreat into Connecticut. The steps of this 
party, and of the main body, were soon hastened by a re- 
port, that the hostile camp was already breaking up, and the 
men dispersing to their several homes. At the bare i-umor 
of the approach of so large an array against them, the insur- 
gent force dissolved like snow in the sunbeams. Dorr sum- 
moned a council of his officers on that day, and the order to 
dismiss the troops was given at seven o'clock in the evening ; 
an hour afterwards, he himself left the camp, and made his 
escape into Connecticut. But the obstinate fatuity of the 
man appears in the senseless boast, which he afterwards ut- 
tered, that, if an attack was not made, on the night of the 
27th, upon Greenville, the nearest post held by the govern- 
ment forces, the failure should be attributed, not to the terror 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 43 

inspired by the number of troops arrayed against them, 
" but to our repudiating friends." A rumor of these occur- 
rences hastened the advance of the troops, who pressed on 
without baking during the night, though it was very dark, and 
the rain poured in torrents. A few hours after daybreak, 
on the morning of the 27th, a considerable force, under 
Colonel Brown, entered the fort at Chepachet, where they 
found only the deserted tents and abandoned artillery of the 
insurgents. They had taken about a hundred prisoners on 
the way ; but the body of Dorr's adherents had dispersed, 
never to appear in arms again. Dorr himself lived as an 
unnoticed fugitive in New Hampshire or Massachusetts, till 
a k\\ months ago, when he returned to Rhode Island, where 
he was immediately arrested, dnd is now in prison there, 
awaiting his trial for treason. The numerous other persons, 
who were arrested for treasonable conduct, have been con- 
temptuously discharged, we believe, without punishment. 

We have only to add, in order to complete our historical 
sketch of the whole affair, that the General Assembly of 
Rhode Island, indefatigable in its efforts to create a form of 
government that would satisfy the whole people, passed an 
act in June for calling another Convention, the delegates to 
which were to be chosen by all male citizens of the United 
States, of the age of twenty-one years or upwards, who had 
had a permanent residence in the State for three years or 
more. This body came together in September, and framed 
a constitution free even from the trifling objections that were 
made to the one proposed by the " Landholders' Conven- 
tion " in the preceding February, and constituting a gov- 
ernment as liberal and equal in respect to the elective fran- 
chise, the representation of the towns, and all other points, 
as that which exists in any State of the Union. This in- 
strument was submitted to the people in November, and 
adopted by an overwhelming vote, the Suffrage party making 
no opposition to it, but staying away from the polls. After 
it was accepted, however, they determined to register their 
names under it as voters, and to make another trial to obtain 
the command of the State through the ballot box. The 
election took place in the spring, and though they used every 
effort, they were again defeated by a large majority, and did 
not succeed in polling much over 7,000 votes. In view of 
these facts, and of the whole history of the latter part of the 



44 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

contest, so far as it affords the means of estimating the num- 
ber of persons arrayed on the opposite sides, we ask again, 
whether it is even conceivable, that the majority of 14,000, al- 
leged to have been obtained for the " People's Constitution," 
in December, 1841, was any thing more than a base and 
shameless fraud ? 

We here close our historical sketch of this remarkable 
contest, which we have endeavoured to render as succinct 
and faithful as possible, having made no statements, as is be- 
heved, but those which are admitted on both sides, and 
which are universally known to be true. With this purpose 
in view, we have relied as much for authority on the speeches 
and letters of Mr. Dorr and his friends, as on the publica- 
tions of their opponents. All the pamphlets and published 
letters and speeches, which grew out of this controversy, 
are very interesting, and most of them, on either side, are 
written with great ability. Those which are mentioned at 
the head of this article, form but a small portion of the num- 
ber that we have examined, for the subject was one of para- 
mount importance, and, sooner or later, it engaged nearly all 
the legal and hterary talent in the State. Mr. Goddard 
handles the question with the taste and elegance of the 
scholar, and the perspicuity of statement and force of rea- 
soning which are characteristic of a well disciplined mind. 
A great amount of historical and legal information is brought 
to bear upon it by Judge Pitman, and while his appeals to the 
good sense and patriotism of his fellow citizens show great 
sincerity and depth of feeling, his argument manifests the im- 
partiality, the comprehensiveness of view, the vigorous logic, 
and the other high qualities of intellect that are developed 
and strengthened by long experience on the bench of justice. 
Mr. Whipple's pamphlet is a masterly display of forensic 
talent, and is worthy of his high reputation as the head of 
the Rhode Island bar. Leaving the authorities and the facts 
to be cited and applied by others, he goes directly to the ab- 
stract subject of dispute, and builds upon it an argument at 
once comj)act, sweeping, nervous, and unanswerable, while 
he fairly riddles the showy pretences and thin sophistry of 
his opponents. Of Judge Durfee's " Charge to the Grand 
Jury," we can only say, that it exhibits broad and generous 
views of the first principles of political science, and of the 
great truths on which the whole theory of government and 



/ 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 45 

social life is founded, and that these principles and truths are 
made to bear wilh irresistible force on the case in hand. 

On the other side, nearly the whole weight of the argu- 
ment rests on the shoulders of Mr. Dorr, and it must be ad- 
mitted, that he sustains the burden with great gallantry and 
steadiness. His intellect is acute, but not comprehensive ; 
his argument is logical, but not convincing, for the premises 
are unsound. He displays an amount of talent and informa- 
tion, that leads one to doubt his sincerity in the foolish and 
wicked cause in which he embarked, notwithstanding the 
pertinacity with which he clung to it under every kind of 
discouragement and defeat. His writings and actions show 
a mind of good natural endowments and tolerable cultivation, 
great argumentative power, considerable tact and executive 
ability in the conduct of affairs, much ambition guided by 
little principle, and an indomitable obstinacy of character, 
that fitted him in an eminent degree to be the leader of a 
faction, and the manager of a protracted contest. 

He had, at least, one coadjutor out of his native Slate, 
whose name we are sorry to see connected with such a cause. 
It is a source of deep regret and mortification, that one who 
had long sustained an unspotted character in the most ele- 
vated judicial station in Massachusetts, and who had recently 
been appointed to the Chief Magistracy, should so far be 
blinded by his political opinions and aspirations, as to appear, 
in some measure, as the defender of revolt in a neighbouring. 
State, as a volunteer in a revolutionary contest with which 
he had nothing to do, and as the advocate of doctrines that sap 
the very foundations of government and social order, which 
the best and most honorable portion of his life had been de- 
voted to sustaining and building up. It is true, that, when 
Governor Morton addressed his published letter to the 
" clambake gathering" at Medbury Grove, the civil war in 
Rhode Island was ended. But this only makes the matter 
worse. The principles of the persons whom he addressed 
were then manifest, for they had been fully illustrated by their 
actions. They had joined in the attack on the arsenal at 
Providence, they had shouldered arms in the insurgent camp 
at Chepachet ; and, in both instances, they had been de- 
feated by the established authorities of the State, supported 
by the great body of the peaceable and well informed inhab- 
itants, and acting under the direct sanction of the legal tri- 
5 



46 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

bunals and of the President of the United States. No 
matter how undecided the language, no matter how cautious 
or ambiguous was the expression of opinion, in a letter ad- 
dressed to such an assembly, convened with such ends in 
view ; for it cannot be denied, that the purpose of this 
" gathering" was to keep up the excitement and the spirit 
of revolt against the established government of Rhode Isl- 
and. To notice such an assembly at all, except in the way 
of indignant censure, was to praise it ; to sanction any of its 
principles, under such circumstances, was to adopt the 
whole. Governor Morton now enjoys the bad eminence of 
being, so far as we know, the only person in the United 
States, that has ever held high judicial office, who has in any 
way lent the sanction of his name to the proceedings of the 
insurgent party of Rhode Island. We freely admit, — 
though the fact hardly palliates at all the conduct or the mo- 
tives of the writer, — that the language of this letter is tem- 
perate, and the principles defended in it generally sound, 
though perverted and sophistical in their application. 

We cannot say as much for another pamphlet in favor of 
the Suffrage party, the title of which is quoted at the head 
of this article. We think "the Boston bar" has good 
ground of action for libel against the person who publishes such 
a performance, while claiming to be "a member of" that 
very respectable body. Its character may be inferred from 
the contemptible fling on the title-page at Dr. Wayland, who 
is there styled, by implication, with about as much wit as 
good manners, a " doctor of despotism." It is a paltry pro- 
duction, written with a very pert and self-satisfied air, 
abounding in flippant assumptions, but indicating a total inca- 
pacity, either of comprehending the questions at issue, or of 
advancing a single argument having a direct and cogent bear- 
ing upon them. In compassion to the writer, it may be 
thrown back, without further notice, into the anonymous ken- 
nel where it belongs. 

We have not left ourselves much space for an argument on 
the Rhode Island question. In truth, hardly any argument is 
needed ; for it is difficult to put the question into any form, 
so that the mere statement of it shall not involve an entire 
refutation of the doctrines of the Suffrage party. Fortu- 
nately, there is no room for controversy about the manner of 
statement, or the meaning of the words in which it is con- 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 47 

veyed ; for ihe practice of the party has furnished a full and 
intelligible commentary upon their doctrines. Their theory 
of government is written out, not merely in words, but in 
deeds, so that he who runs may read it. We have told the 
story, and there is, consequently, no difficulty in getting at 
the point in dispute. The question is, whether any number 
of persons may, at any time, come together, and without 
observing any of the forms of law, declare that they are 
"the people," or a majority of the people, and, as such, 
proceed to destroy the whole fabric of the existing govern- 
ment, and in its place create laws and establish a constitution, 
which shall be binding on the whole population of the State ? 
Are they entitled to assume, that they are 14,000 in number, 
and, without furnishing any evidence even of this fact, go on 
at once to form a government which shall be obligatory on 
108,000 souls ? We say, " without furnishing any evidence 
even of this fact," for the actual returns have never been seen 
or summed up except by some half a dozen members of the 
Suffrage association or convention, nor have they been at- 
tested on oath, nor verified in any way. Who authorized 
fourteen individuals to act for the hundred and eight, of whom 
they were a part, and to make laws which should be bind- 
ing on the whole, not only without the expressed consent 
of their fellows, but in spite of their earnest and repeated 
protest ? It is impossible to answer this question, except 
by admitting the fundamental fact, which lies at the origin, 
not only of all government, but of all society, — that the 
state.) or, in other words, the people, under any circumstances, 
even at a revolutionary period, is a kind of corporation, 
an organized body politic, a unit, acting only through estab- 
lished forms, by its legally appointed agents. Of course, 
this admission would be fatal to all the pretensions of the 
Suffrage party. 

The constitution of Massachusetts was ratified and made 
binding upon posterity, because it was approved, says Mr. 
J. Q. Adams, " by more than two thirds of about 15,000 
persons who voted upon it, out of a population of 350,000, 
or one vote for every thirty-five souls." But who doubts 
the popular origin and character of our government ? These 
15,000 persons, having complied with all legal requisitions, 
and acting upon a subject on which they were specially em- 
powered at the time to act, passed a fundamental law, which 



48 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

will be binding on them and their posterity for all future time, 
or until it shall be repealed in as formal a manner as it was 
enacted. Who pretends, that fifteen, or even twenty, thou- 
sand persons, of any class or character, might now come 
together, at their own instance only, without being specially 
delegated or authorized for such a purpose, and at once put 
a statute of their own formation in the place of this law ? 
Even if a vast majority of the whole population of the State 
should become discontented with the constitution and desire 
to change it, they could not effect their purpose except by 
compliance with the established forms, — by manifesting 
their wishes in the appointed way, and waiting the appoint- 
ed time (which, in this case, is at least two years), for their 
wishes to be carried into effect. 

It is true, that our institutions repeatedly recognize the 
right of the majority to rule. But what majority ? And 
how far, or how absolutely, can they rule ? Only the ma- 
jority in formally constituted bodies, recognized and appoint- 
ed by the fundamental laws of the State, and acting within 
prescribed bounds upon regularly defined matters committed 
to their charge by these laws. Thus, the constitution per- 
mits a majority of the legislature to make laws, though only 
upon specified subjects, and within specified limits. But a 
number of men cannot band themselves together, forcibly 
unite themselves to the legally appointed legislators, and 
then, because they constitute a majority of the whole united 
body, pass such laws as they see fit. Such majorities are 
only unauthorized mobs, and so far as they usurp the func- 
tions of legislation or government, all persons participating 
in their acts are liable to the penalties of^ treason. The case 
is precisely similar with the constituted body of electors, 
who are authorized or deputed, so to speak, to represent 
the whole body politic, to act for it and to bind it by their acts, 
though they never form more than a fifth part of the whole num- 
ber of individuals who are thus bound. They are empowered 
to elect the members of the legislature and the officers of 
the executive department, and this right of election is their 
sole and peculiar prerogative. A number of minors, pau- 
pers, convicts, individuals not paying taxes, or persons oth- 
erwise disqualified by the constitution, may not come togeth- 
er to usurp the privileges and functions of these electors, 
and because they constitute the major part of the aggregate 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 49 

thus irregularly formed, proceed to exercise all the powers 
of the primitive body, and to make their acts obligatory 
upon the whole State. To do this is not only to vio- 
late the particular constitution established in that State, but 
to pull down the whole fabric of society and government. 
If they attempt it, their acts are not binding upon a single 
person, out of their own number, in the whole community. 
Members of the reputed minority, — nay, even women and 
children, — would at once have a perfect right to refuse 
obedience. Yet this is precisely the Rhode Island case, 
and these are the pretensions of the Suffrage party. 

Again, it is not true, either in the theory or the practice of 
our institutions, that the majority, even in legally constituted 
bodies, can rule in all cases, this very power of forming new 
constitutions, or amending old ones, being one of the admit- 
ted exceptions. Thus, the constitution of the United States 
cannot be amended or repealed by the will of a mere major- 
ity. A concurrence of two thirds in both houses of Con- 
gress, or of the legislatures of two thirds of the several 
States, is necessary before an amendment can even be pro- 
posed ; and then it must be ratified by not less than three 
fourths of the States, before it becomes a part of the instru- 
ment. Owing to the inequality in size and population of the sev- 
eral States, the disproportion between the majority and minor- 
ity, in certain cases, must be very great, before an amendment 
can be adopted. We find, from a calculation founded on 
the last census, that in a case affecting the interests of the 
smaller States, so that they would be united in opposition to 
the measure, an amendment of the constitution might be de- 
feated by less than one twelfth part of the whole population of 
the country. In other words, if eleven twelfths of the people 
of the United States should attempt to alter the constitution, 
they could rightfully be defeated by the remaining twelfth ; or 
if they attempted to carry through the measure with a high 
hand, after the manner of Dorr and his associates, Rhode 
Island herself would be the first to protest against the act, 
as a gross usurpation of the powers of government, and a 
violation of compact. And what inequality in the elective 
franchise or the ratio of representation had the Sufl^rage part.y 
to complain of, as great as that which now exists in the Sen- 
ate of the United States, in which Rhode Island, with a 
population of less than a hundred and nine thousand, has as 
5* 



50 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

many members as New York, with her two and a half mil- 
lions of inhabitants ! The disproportion in this case is near- 
ly as one to twenty-five, and a majority of twelve to one 
, would have no right to restore the equality. 

Is it said, that the constitution of the United States offers 
a peculiar case, being instituted for a limited purpose by 
special compact, and not designed to cover the whole ground, 
or to answer all the ends, of an entire frame of government ? 
Let us look, then, at the constitutions of the individual 
States, and find how far they can be moulded at will by a 
mere majority of the people. It is almost superfluous to 
say, at the outset, that in no one instance is a power over 
the instrument accorded to any other persons than the quali- 
fied voters, whom it points out and describes. While all 
admit, either expressly or by obvious implication, the right 
of " the people " to change their forms of government, they 
proceed immediately to prescribe the manner and the time 
of effecting any change, the class of individuals by whom 
alone it can be accomplished, what proportion of this fa- 
vored number, who alone are recognized as " the people," 
must concur in the desire for an alteration, and under what 
conditions only it can be effected. In no case, can a change 
be made with the same facility with which new officers are 
appointed at the annual elections ; that is, by the vote of a 
mere majority, taking immediate effect. Always some de- 
lay, giving time for more experience and more mature con- 
sideration, or a vote much greater than that of a mere ma- 
jority, affording clearer evidence that the change is generally 
desired, is necessary, before the fundamental law of the State 
can be modified in the slightest degree. 

We have no room even for the briefest abstract of the 
provisions of all the State constitutions on this important 
point. We can give only a few instances to show how dis- 
tinctly the supposed absolute power of the majority in this 
respect is denied, or with what important restrictions it is 
hampered. In Maine, two thirds of both houses of the 
legislature must deem an alteration necessary, before the 
people can act upon the constitution at all ; and then a ma- 
jority of the qualified voters must sanction this decided ex- 
pression of opinion on the part of the legislature, before the 
change can be effected. In Massachusetts, a change must 
first be desired by a majority of the Senators and by two 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 51 

thirds of the Representatives ; the proposed amendment 
must then he over for a year, and be approved by an equal- 
ly preponderating vote of the next legislature ; then it may 
be submitted to the qualified voters, and if ratified by a ma- 
jority of their voices, it goes into effect. In Connecticut, a 
majority of the representatives may propose an amendment, 
which must be referred to the next General Assembly, and 
there be approved by two thirds of each house ; it may then 
be laid before the people, and become a part of the constitu- 
tion, if sanctioned by a majority of the ordinary voters. In 
New York, the provision is the same as in Connecticut, ex- 
cept that a majority of both houses, instead of the represen- 
tatives only, must be in favor of it, before ihe amendment can 
be first proposed. In South Carolina, the people have no 
power to act directly upon the constitution ; an amendment 
must be agreed to by two thirds of both branches of the 
legislature, be then referred to the succeeding year, and, if 
again approved by a like vote of two thirds, it goes into ef- 
fect. In Ohio, if two thirds of the General Assembly think 
it necessary to alter the constitution, they may require the 
voters at the next general election to declare whether they 
are desirous of holding a convention for this purpose ; if a 
majority of the voters are in favor of it, the next General 
Assembly may call a convention, by which alterations can 
be made. 

It is useless to go further. The instances here given are 
taken at random, and are enough to show what is the general 
tenor of the State constitutions in this important respect. 
In all, the doctrine that a mere majority of the people may 
alter the constitution at any time, as they see fit, is emphati- 
cally rejected. In all, the previous action of the legislature 
is needed — usually a greatly preponderating vote in both 
branches — and in most cases, much delay is necessary, 
however pressing may be the emergency, or however general 
the desire for a change. Contrast these wise provisions 
with the theory and practice of the Suffrage party in Rhode 
Island, where a mere assemblage of individuals, who were 
not even qualified voters, and who acted not only without the 
consent of the legislature, but in spite of the direct refusal 
of that body to have any part in the matter, so that it even 
disavowed and prohibited all their proceedings, undertook of 
their own authority to throw down the government that had 



» 52 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

been established for nearly two hundred years, and to put an- 
other of their own formation in its place. Will it be believed, 
that the defenders of such proceedings cite from the State 
constitutions, and the writers on constitutional law, repeated 
declarations, that " the people " have a right to make and 
alter their own forms of government, without saying a word 
of the explanation that immediately follows, which shows 
who are understood to be " the people," and what forms, 
what organs, and what majorities are necessary to enable 
them to exercise this right ? They fasten on the abstract 
expression of a right, without uttering a syllable about the 
manner in which the use of this privilege is immediately de- 
fined and limited. 

Is it said, that the charter did not authorize the legislature 
to make, from time to time, such changes in the form of gov- 
ernment as might appear expedient ? We answer by a 
prompt denial of the fact. Among the powers expressly 
granted to the General Assembly by this instrument is the 
following : " to make, ordain, constitute, or repeal such laws, 
statutes, orders, and ordinances, forms, and ceremonies of 
government and magistracy, as to them shall seem meet for 
the good and welfare of the said company." Power more 
unlimited, or language more comprehensive, could hardly be 
devised. Besides, as we have seen, the power to determine 
or alter the elective franchise was confessedly in the hands 
of the legislature alone, and was repeatedly exercised by 
them, so that this body, by a simple enactment, without 
touching the fundamental law of the State, might, at any 
time, have redressed almost the only grievance of which the 
Suffrage party complained. This party, therefore, by their 
violent proceedings, not only usurped the functions of the 
founders of a new State, but actually assumed the exclusive 
prerogatives and duties of their own legislators for the time 
being. 

Ts it said, that the limitations on the right of suffrage in 
Rhode Island were anti-republican, and at variance with the 
genius of our institutions ? We might answer, that this is 
a disputed point, and that to determine it was exclusively 
the province of the legislature. But we are willing to go 
further, and to show that universal suffrage does not now ex- 
ist, and never has existed, in any State of this union ; that 
there are greater or less restrictions of the elective franchise 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 53 

in them all ; that the qualifications of a voter in Rhode Island 
were not much higher than in sevejal other States ; and that 
it is absurd to attempt to found a distinction in principle upon 
a mere difference in degree. Again, we have neither time 
nor space for an analysis of all the State constitutions ; but 
we find in Mr. Hazard's " Report," made in 1829, a brief 
summary of their provisions in this respect, which was prob- 
ably correct at the time the Report was made, and which is 
quite enough to establish all that is here advanced. 

"Of the twenty-four States already embraced in the Union, 
Virginia and Rhode Island require a freehold qualification for 
voters. Connecticut requires a freehold of seven pounds yearly 
value, or the payment of taxes, or one year's service in the mi- 
litia, (unless excused,) and that the voters shall have gained a 
settlement in the State ; and, turning to the laws of that Slate to 
ascertain what the applicant has to do to gain a settlement^ we 
find, that if he comes from a sister State, he must reside at least 
one year in the town in Connecticut where he is to gain his set- 
tlement, and must be possessed, in his own right, in fee, of 
real estate in that State of the value of three hundred and 
thirty-four dollars, free of incumbrance, the deed of which shall 
have been one year on record ; and without such substantial re- 
commendation, he gains no settlement, unless especially favored 
by the authority of the town. Maryland requires a freehold of 
fifty acres, or property to the amount of thirty pounds. North 
Carolina requires a freehold of fifty acres to vote for senators ; 
the payment of taxes to vote for county members ; and a free- 
hold to vote for town representatives. South Carolina, a free- 
hold of fifty acres, or payment of taxes. Tennessee, a freehold 
in the county where the vote is given, unless the voter is resident 
there. New Jersey requires fifty pounds 2)roclamat.io7i money, 
clear estate. New York requires that the voter shall pay taxes, 
(unless exempted,) or serve in the militia, (unless excused,) or 
be assessed to labor on the highway ; in which case, he must be 
three years an inhabitant of the State, and one year of the town 
or county where he votes. Mississippi requires payment of taxes 
or enrolment in the militia. Seven other States, namely, New 
Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Ohio, Geor- 
gia, and Louisiana, require only the payment of taxes as evi- 
dence of property. The remaining seven, namely, Maine, Ver- 
mont, Kentucky, Illinois, Alabama, Indiana, and Missouri re- 
quire no property qualification, nor any equivalent or substitute. 
The constitutions of all the States, except three, expressly ex- 
clude females. In two of those three, they are excluded by 



54 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

construction ; and, in the other (New Jersey), where females 
formerly voted, in high party times, they are now excluded by 
act of the legislature., amending the constitution. Thirteen of 
the States expressly exclude all people of color. The other 
eleven, namely, Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Ver- 
mont, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, North 
Carolina, Georgia, and Tennessee, admit, or do not expressly 
exclude them. But one of these, (New York,) makes a marked 
distinction between her white and her colored voters ; — requir- 
ing of the latter freehold estates, for which they pay taxes of 
two hundred and fifty pounds value, and three years' instead of 
one year's residence. One State excludes paupers ; another, 
paupers and persons under guardianship ; a third adds Indians 
not taxed to these exclusions. Connecticut requires the qualifi- 
cation of a good moral character ; and Vermont requires peace- 
ble and quiet behaviour, and an oath. Pennsylvania and Dela- 
ware allow the sons of voters to vote for one year after coming 
of age. Every State requires a residence of a shorter or longer 
time, from three months up to three years. Every State ex- 
cludes all under twenty-one years of age. Five of them only 
require citizenship of the United States." — pp. 18, 19. 

" But the feature in the constitutions we have been speaking 
of, least in harmony with the doctrine of universal right of suf- 
frage, (which, in other respects, is carried to such extremes in 
those instruments,) is the striking difference they make in the- 
qualifications of the electors, and of those whom they are allowed 
to elect. In none of those States (except Connecticut) can a 
single one of the electors, who is barely qualified to act as such, 
be himself elected a representative, much less a senator. In 
most of those States, a senator or representative (with some dif- 
ference as to amount) must possess a clear freehold estate of 
very considerable extent, — from one hundred to five hundred 
acres ; and, of value, from one hundred pounds to one thousand 
dollars. In one State, the freehold must be worth five hundred 
pounds sterling; and, in another, a thousand pounds sterling, 
clear of debt. And where real and personal property together 
make the qualification, the amount required is still much greater. 
In one State, in addition to a freehold of five hundred acres, the 
candidate must oion ten negroes. The term of residence, also, 
must be much longer than is required for voters, namely, from 
one to seven years ; and the candidates must be of more mature 
age, namely, from twenty-two up to thirty-five years, in different 
States." — pp. 21,22. 

The truth is, that in the United States, and in every 



, The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 55 

otlier country on earth, wherein the right of the people to 
manage their own affairs and govern themselves is asserted 
and exercised, "the people " is understood to be a specific 
and peculiar phrase, not comprehending " all persons," but 
assuming by prescription to represent all. Otherwise, it 
would be impossible for the machinery of a government to 
exist. Aon omnia possumus omnes. We cannot all be 
governors, legislators, and voters at the same time. There 
must be delegations, and organized bodies, and deputed 
trusts, and virtual representations ; or the wheels of govern- 
ment must stop short, and men must go back to a state of 
nature, to reside in caverns and forests, in the condition de- 
scribed in the expressive language of Hobbes ; " no arts, 
no letters, no society, and, which is worst of all, continual 
fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man, soli- 
tary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." The most perfect 
democracy that now exists, or of which there is any re- 
cord in history, is that of a town meeting in a New Eng- 
land country village. But even there, are moderators, and 
rules of proceeding, and qualified voters, and business con- 
fined to the matters mentioned in the warrant. So it must 
ever be. The very idea of a government is that of something 
which is stable, that proceeds by fixed rules, and in which 
one person represents many, and binds them by his acts. 
Not even the sovereign power in a state, which has any pre- 
tensions to freedom, can modify or abolish it at his own 
pleasure. " It is contrary to reason," said the citizens of 
Boston, in May, 17G4, to their representatives in the Gen- 
eral Court, instructing them to remonstrate against some of 
the offensive Acts of Trade, " it is contrary to reason, that 
the supreme power should have right to alter the constitu- 
tion." If it could be so, it would be a despotism instead of 
a free government, no matter whether the despotic power 
were lodged in the hands of a king or a mob, a Louis the 
Fourteenth or a Jacobin club at Paris. 

Name and define our form of polity as you please ; call 
it a republic, a democracy, or any thing else ; it is still a 
government. It must embrace, then, those elements of per- 
manency and stability, which mark the distinction between 
organized society and the natural state of man, because they 
enable men to see what they are to expect, and to regulate 
their conduct for the future by some fixed rules, without de- 



56 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

pending on the caprice of individuals, or the whim of a mo- 
ment. It must not be changed without grave dehberation, 
much delay, and the consentaneous operation of all the parts. 
Allow the principles of the Suffrage party to prevail, and 
the constitution of no State in the union is safe. A body 
of individuals may at any time come together, declare that 
they are " the people," pull down the whole structure of 
the government, and put one of their own fashioning in its 
place. The question is, therefore, whether we really have 
a permanent habitation, or are only tenants at will of a crazy 
building, of which the walls may crumble, and the roof top- 
ple down on our heads at any moment. 

In this connexion, some of the weighty and magnificent 
sentences of Burke, in which the depth of thought and so- 
lemnity of sentiment are equalled only by the splendor of 
the diction, are so appropriate, that we cannot withstand the 
temptation to lay them before our readers. 

" Society is indeed a contract. Subordinate contracts for ob- 
jects of more occasional interest may be deposited at pleasure. 
But the state ought not to be considered as nothing better than a 
partnership agreement in a trade of pepper and coffee, caHco or 
tobacco, or some such other low concern, to be taken up for a 
little temporary interest, and to be dissolved by the fancy of the 
parties. It is to be looked on whh other reverence ; because it 
is not a partnership in things subservient only to the gross animal 
existence, of a temporary and perishable nature. It is a part- 
nership in all science ; a partnership in all art ; a partnership in 
every virtue, and in all perfection. As the ends of such a part- 
nership cannot be obtained in many generations, it becomes a 
partnership not only between those who are living, but between 
those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to 
be born. Each contract of each particular state is but a clause 
in the great primeval contract of eternal society, linking the 
lower with the higher natures, connecting the visible and in- 
visible world, according to a fixed compact, sanctioned by the 
inviolable oath, which holds all physical and all moral natures, 
each in their appointed place. This law is not subject to the 
will of those, who, by an obligation above them and infinitely su- 
perior, are bound to submit their will to that law. The munici- 
pal corporations of that universal kingdom are not morally at lib- 
erty, at their pleasure, and on their speculations of a contingent 
improvement, wholly to separate and tear asunder the bands of 
their subordinate community, and to dissolve it into an unsocial, 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 57 

uncivil, imconnecled chaos of elementary principles. It is the 
first and supreme necessity only, a necessity that is not chosen 
but chooses, a necessity paramount to deliberation, that admits 
no discussion, and demands no evidence, which alone can justify 
a resort to anarchy. This necessity is no exception to the rule ; 
because this necessity itself is a part, too, of that moral and 
physical disposition of things, to which man must be obedient by 
consent or force. But if that, which is on.ly submission to ne- 
cessity, should be made the object of choice, the law is broken, 
nature is disobeyed, and the rebellious are outlawed, cast forth, 
and exiled from this world of reason, and order, and peace, and 
virtue, and fruitful penitence, into the antagonist world of mad- 
ness, discord, vice, confusion, and unavailing sorrow.'"* 

To justify the proceedings of Dorr and his associates, it 
is necessary to go the extravagant length of affirming, that 
when they commenced their operations, no legal government 
existed in Rhode Island, that their fundamental laws went 
into effect in default of any competition, and that ihey mere- 
ly established a new society, instead of breaking up an old 
one. The absurdity of this statement appears from the brief 
sketch that we have given of the history of the charter. 
We have shown, that the founders of Rhode Island formed 
themselves into a body politic, and declared that their form 
of government was a democracy, or rule of the people ; 
that they subsequently obtained from the king, at their own 
solicitation, a charter confirming them in the exercise of 
these rights, and permitting them to choose all their own of- 
ficers, and make all their own laws ; that this charter, though 
sanctioned by the monarch, derived its whole binding force 
within the colony from the voluntary acceptance and ratifica- 
tion of it by the people ; that it was acknowledged and hated 
by the royal governors and the other partisans of prerogative, 
during the whole Colonial period, as establishing a confessed 
republic or democracy ; that it continued in force, because, 
having once been established by the people, the people never 
abrogated it ; that under its provisions, and acting through 
the legal authorities constituted by it, the State became a 
party to the American Revolution, entered the Confederacy 
of 1778, and accepted the Federal Constitution of 1787 ; 
and that it continued after the Revolution in undisputed 



Reflections on the Revolution in France. 



53 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

force, and subject to no conaplaint or doubt, for at least forty 
years. We question whether there was ever a government 
on the face of the earth, which had a better claim to be con- 
sidered as existing "by the grace of God " and by the will 
of the people. 

The rightful authority of this system is further strengthen- 
ed by the consideration, that the government of Connecticut, 
down to the year 1818, stood on precisely similar founda- 
tions, and its legal power was never impugned. In confirm- 
ation of our own argument on this point, we make a short 
extract from Judge Swift's admirable digest of the laws of 
Connecticut. The remarks are so apposite, that they may 
be applied Jo the Rhode Island case without the alteration 
of a word ; and as the book was published in 1795, its au- 
thor must be regarded as an independent and impartial wit- 
ness. 

" It is unquestionably true, that in consequence of the dissolu- 
tion of the political connexion with Great Britain, the people of this 
State had a right, if they had thought proper to have exerted it, 
to have met in convention, and established a different form of 
government. But at the declaration of independence, the sub- 
ject was considered in a different light. The authority of the 
government was supposed to have originated from the assent of 
the people, and never to have been dependent on the royal char- 
ter. During the whole period of the existence of the Colonial 
government, Connecticut was considered, as having only paid a 
nominal allegiance to the British crown, for the purpose of re- 
ceiving protection and defence, as a part of the British empire ; 
but always exercised legislation respecting all the internal con- 
cerns of the community, to the exclusion of all authority and 
control from the king and parliament, as much as an inde- 
pendent State. Acts of parliament were not deemed binding 
here, and the assent of the king and parliament was not ne- 
cessary to give efficacy to our statutes. The necessary con- 
sequence was, that the renunciation of allegiance to the British 
crown, and the withdrawing from the British empire, did not 
in any degree affect, or alter, the constitution of the govern- 
ment. The constitution which originated from the people, and 
had been practised upon, continued in operation, after the dec- 
laration of independence, in the same manner as before, and 
was equally valid. The people were only discharged from a 
nominal allegiance to the British crown, which they had recog- 
nized for the purpose of protection and defence. These being 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 59 

withdrawn by Great Britain, and war made upon them, they had 
a right to enter into a confederacy with any other States for the 
purpose of mutual defence ; but their internal government re- 
mained unaltered and the same." — pp. 57,58. 

As the American Revolution did not impair the authority 
of the charter or the government established under it, so 
neither was there any thing in the conduct or the principles 
of the men at that period, which gives any sanction to the 
proceedings of the Suffrage party. We have already shown, 
that this great event was the most orderly revolution, that 
the world has ever witnessed. It was not a mere revolt, 
conducted by disorderly assemblages of men, suddenly 
throwing oft' a yoke which they had patiently borne for many 
years, and fanatically combating in defence of abstract prin- 
ciples to the value and importance of which their own eyes 
were but just opened. It was not a Quixotic crusade in fa- 
vor of human rights in general, nor a war undertaken only to 
show that all men were free and equal, and had a right to 
govern themselves as they saw fit. It was rather the grave 
and deliberate act of a great country, that had grown up, in 
less than two centuries, as a dependency of England, and 
had gloried in this connexion with the land of its fathers, and 
in the privileges which inured to its people in their character 
as British subjects, till the aggressions of the crown and the 
oppressive conduct of the administration made it necessary 
to sever the tie, and to strike boldly in defence of these 
privileges, and of the more general rights of humanity, to 
which they were at last compelled, though reluctantly, to 
make appeal. They fought through the whole earlier part 
of the struggle, not for the acquisition of new privileges, but 
for the preservation of old ones ; not for the abstract doc- 
trine of the equality of the human race, but for the mainte- 
nance of their charters, and of the right, which they had in- 
herited from their fathers, of being taxed only by their own 
representatives. It is true, they were driven, at last, by " a 
long train of abuses and usurpations,''^ to throw off" their de- 
pendency on the British crown, " and to provide new guards 
for their future security." But it was a grave and awful 
necessity, like that of sundering the tie between parent and 
child. Even then, they did nothing in hatred, haste, or 
malice. They say, in language which is rather pathetic 
than denunciatory or triumphant, " we must, therefore, ac- 



60 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

quiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation " ; 
and they declare, " that all political connexion between thenn 
and the state of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally 
dissolved." And this was the grand result of the Revolu- 
tion, — to dissolve '■'■ all political connexion ^^ with Eng- 
land, and not to proclaim a new gospel of human rights ; to 
fall back on their primitive institutions, and not to destroy 
them and to put new ones in their place ; to strike out one 
principle of American law, and not to abrogate the whole 
code. 

Is this a novel and merely speculative view of the great 
contest of 1776 ? Look, then, at the conduct, the speeches 
and the writings of the earlier patriots, the proper " fathers 
of the Revolution," — of such men as James Otis, John 
Dickinson, and Dr. Franklin. They all boasted of the con- 
nexion of the country with England, and gloried in the title 
of British subjects ; they were strongly attached to the land 
which they still called their " home " ; they acknowledged 
the duty of allegiance to the crown, and spoke with the 
gloomiest apprehensions of measures for a separation, that 
might be forced upon them, if the ministry persisted in their 
schemes. The General Court of Massachusetts, in a me- 
morial against the " Sugar Act," which they transmitted to 
their agent in England in the summer of 1764, declared, 
that " the connexion between Great Britain and her Colo- 
nies is so natural and strong, as to make their mutual happi- 
ness depend upon their mutual support. Nothing can. tend 
more to the destruction of both, and to forward the measures 
of their enemies, than sowing the seeds of jealousy, animos- 
ity, and dissention between the mother country and the Col- 
onies." James Otis, in his " Rights of the British Colonies," 
published the same year, when he was the avowed leader of 
the patriotic party in Massachusetts, writes thus : "We all 
think ourselves happy under Great Britain. We love, es- 
teem, and reverence our mother country, and adore our 
king. And could the choice of independency be offered 
the Colonies, or subjection to Great Britain upon any terms 
above absolute slavery, I am convinced they would accept 
the latter." As late as July, 1774, John Dickinson, " the 
Pennsylvania Farmer," wrote the " instructions " presented 
by the deputies of several counties in Pennsylvania to their 
representatives in the General Assembly, from which we 
make the following extract. 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 61 

" We well know, that the Colonists are charged by many per- 
sons in Great Britain, with attempting to obtain such an exclu- 
sion [of 0711/ power of parliament over these Colonies] and a 
total independence on her. As well we know the accusation to 
be utterly false. We can safely appeal to that Being, from whom 
no thought can be concealed, that our warmest wish and utmost 
ambition is, that we and our posterity may ever remain subordi- 
nate to and dependent upon our parent state. This submission 
our reason approves, our affection dictates, our duty commands, 
and our interest enforces." 

Washington, as late as October, 1774, writes to a friend 
in Boston as follows : 

" I was involuntarily led into a short discussion of this subject 
by your remarks on the conduct of the Boston people, and your 
opinion of their wishes to set up for independency. I am well 
satisfied, that no such thing is desired by any thinking man in 
all North America ; on the contrary, that it is the ardent wish 
of the warmest advocates for liberty, that peace and tranquillity, 
upon constitutional grounds, may be restored, and the horrors of 
civil discord prevented." 

In a long note upon this passage, Mr. Sparks brings to- 
gether an array of citations and authorities upon this point, 
which are perfectly decisive.* We can find room only for 
a few brief extracts. John Jay says : 

" During the course of my life, and until after the second 
petition of Congress, in 1775, I never did hear an American of 
any class, or of any description, express a wish for the indepen- 
dence of the Colonies. It has always been, and still is, my opin- 
ion and belief, that our country was prompted and impelled to 
independence by necessity, and not by choice." 

" That there existed a general desire of independence of the 
crown, in any part of America, before the revolution, is as far 
from the truth, as the zenith from the nadir. For my own part, 
there was not a moment during the revolution, when I would not 
have given every thing I possessed for a restoration to the state 
of things before the contest began, provided we could have had 
a sufficient security for its continuance." 

And Mr. Jefferson affirmed, 

" What, eastward of New York, might have been the dispo- 
sitions towards England before the commencement of hostili- 
ties, I know not ; before that, I never heard a whisper of a 

* Washington's Works, \\. ^. A^G. 
6* 



62 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

disposition to separate from Great Britain ; and after that, its 
possibility was contemplated with affliction by all." 

Similar opinions, expressed in language quite as strong, 
are found throughout Franklin's correspondence for eight or 
nine years after the date of the Stamp Act. Even the old 
Congress, in the autumn of 1774, in an address to the peo- 
ple of Great Britain, use the following language. " You 
have been told that we are seditious, impatient of govern- 
ment, and desirous of independency. Be assured, that 
these are not facts but calumnies. Permit us to be as free 
as yourselves, and we shall ever esteem a union with 
you to be our greatest glory and our greatest happiness." 
And in their address to the king, they say : " We ask 
but for peace, liberty, and safety. We wish not a diminu- 
tion of the prerogative, nor do we solicit the grant of any 
new right in our favor. Your royal authority over us, and 
our connexion with Great Britain, we shall always carefully 
and zealously endeavour to support and maintain." 

It is useless to multiply these citations. Enough has been 
given to support our view of the sentiments and doctrines 
maintained by the patriots of this country at the beginning of 
the war with England, and to show that there is nothing in 
them which harmonizes with the disorganizing and anarchical 
theory and practice of the Suffrage party in Rhode Island. 
Even the abstract assertion of the natural rights of man, with 
which the Declaration of Independence opens, if viewed in 
light cast upon it by the writings and the actions of its sign- 
ers, must not be taken in its broad and literal meaning, as 
then actually reduced to practice ; but as put forward only 
to justify the single step of a separation from England. Ac- 
cordingly they say, that ^^ whenever any form of government 
becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the peo- 
ple to alter or abolish it " ; but they go on immediately to 
qualify this assertion by the remark, that " prudence, indeed, 
will dictate, that governments long established ought not to 
be changed for light and transient causes." 

It is more directly connected with our present purpose to 
remark, that the revolution of 1776 was directed entirely by 
duly organized assemblies and associations, legally constitut- 
ed, representing bodies politic. The authority on which 
they acted was not derived merely from casual and tumultu- 
ous assemblages of the people, into which any person might 
enter, and where every man had a voice. It was drawn, in 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 63 

most cases, from long established legislative assemblies, ex- 
isting according to law ; and when circumstances prevented 
such assemblies from coming together, conventions were or- 
ganized in their place, closely resembling them in every par- 
ticular. Such conventions were never held to displace the 
regular legislatures, to usurp their functions, or to dispute 
their authority. 

Our limits will not permit us to illustrate and support 
this proposition at length. We can only call attention to a 
few facts and authorities, which are still enough to leave no 
doubt upon the suhject. The inhabitants of Boston, who 
played the chief part in the opening scenes of the Revolu- 
tion, acted only in legal town meetings, duly called by the 
selectmen, and properly organized. An irregular conven- 
tion of deputies from the towns in Massachusetts was held at 
Boston in 1768 ; but it was called only on account of the 
refusal of the governor to convene the General Court ; and 
it sat but a few days, and did but little business, for the con- 
fidence of the people was not with it. The members ex- 
pressly disclaimed " any pretence to authoritative, or gov- 
ernmental acts," and soon gladly resigned their task of 
defending the people's rights into the hands of the people's 
legal representatives. The delegates to the first Continental 
Congress were chosen, sometimes by the regular Assemblies, 
sometimes by a convention of committees appointed by the 
people for this purpose, and, in a few instances, by the com- 
mittees themselves. " It is not likely," says ]NIr. Sparks, 
" that in a single elective body on the continent, there was 
an instance of a member's taking his seat, without exhibiting 
a well authenticated certificate, that he was duly chosen. "=* 
The credentials of the members are printed in full in the 
journals of the old Congress, and it appears, that they were 
examined before the individuals were allowed to take their 
seats. We find there the certificate of the governor of 
Rhode Island, given under the Colonial seal, certifying that 
Stephen Hopkins and Samuel Ward had been duly nomin- 
ated and appointed delegates by the General Assembly of the 
Colony. Similar certificates, though without the signature 
of the governor, were presented by the members from Mas- 
sachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and South 

* Sparkss Life of Morris, I. p. 32. 



64 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

Carolina. Mr. Jefferson himself, the author of the " De- 
claration," took his seat under credentials duly approved by 
the General Assembly of Virginia. The members from the 
city and county of New York produced certificates, that 
they had been chosen "by duly certified polls." Other 
counties in New York sent delegates, and in two of them, at 
least. Orange and Westchester, it seems that only '■^free- 
holders " voted, after the manner of the old elections. And 
it was undoubtedly the general rule throughout the country, 
that in choosing members of conventions, provincial con- 
gresses, or committees for appointing delegates to the Conti- 
nental Congress, only those were allowed to act who were 
regularly qualified to vote according to the standing laws or 
practice of each Colony. Exceptions there may have been 
in some cases, under very pressing emergencies, when 
business was transacted in great haste, or under great ex- 
citement ; but the general rule was unquestionably as we 
have stated. 

We will not weary the patience of our readers by addu- 
cing further evidence to show, that the spirit of the Ameri- 
can Revolution is directly opposed to the pretensions and 
the conduct of the insurgent party in Rhode Island. We 
feel as if it were an insult to the memory of the patriots who 
achieved our independence, to pursue the comparison that we 
have here instituted. It is necessary to go to the history of 
other countries, or to some later and more mournful passages 
in our own annals, to find a fit parallel to the proceedings of 
the Suffrage party. We find one in the disgraceful and ter- 
rific scenes of the earlier part of the French Revolution, 
when all France groaned under the tyranny of the mob 
of Paris and its environs, when constitutions were made, 
sworn to, and abrogated, as if they were the playthings of an 
hour, and when the pernicious doctrines of Jacobinism 
were first preached to the world, and enforced by the pike, 
the bayonet, and the guillotine. Illegal assemblies usurped 
the character and office of duly appointed legislatures. Un- 
authorized clubs overawed the government, and the reign of 
terror susperseded that of order and law. The theory, that 
any collection of individuals may assume the name of " the 
people," may pursue their ends by means of intimidation 
and force, and mould the constitution of the state to their 
own will, was there carried out and illustrated in a way 
equally shocking to reason and humanity. 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 65 

Since the separation of this country from England, there 
have been three formidable revolts against the authority of 
the established government, each of which caused great terror 
and excitement at the time, but was finally subdued by a large 
military force, with little bloodshed, and a signal display of 
clemency towards the vanquished. The first was the Shays 
rebellion in Massachusetts, in 1786 ; the second was the 
" whiskey insurrection," in 1794, in the western part of Penn- 
sylvania ; and the third was the rebellion that we have now 
been considering. Of these three, the last was far the most 
flagitious, as it was unprovoked by any practical grievance, 
and not palliated by any distress in the circumstances of the 
insurgent population. It was a causeless revolt, not incited 
by the weight of heavy taxation, not growing out of com- 
mercial distress, nor nurtured by the destitution and misery 
of the disaffected classes. In every respect but this, the 
rebellion first mentioned affords a remarkable parallel to it. 
The closest resemblance exists between the two, in regard 
to the character and numbers of the rebels, the doctrines 
that they advanced, and the means by which they were sup- 
pressed. 

The disturbances in Massachusetts grew out of the sick 
and exhausted condition of the whole country at the close of 
the Revolutionary war. Public and private debts existed to 
an enormous amount, agriculture and commerce stagnated, 
taxation was heavy, and distress was universal. At this 
time, Shays and his associates undertook to shut up the 
courts'^by violence, and to intimidate the government into the 
adoption of their unjust and arbitrary measures. It is cer- 
tain, that their party had the majority in several counties ; it 
is quite probable, that they had the majority in the whole 
State ; for their great object was to postpone the decision of 
the whole matter till a new legislature should be chosen, 
when they were confident of obtaining the command of both 
branches. They held unlicensed conventions, in which 
more than fifty towns were represented, " voted their own 
constitutionality," assumed the name of the peo])le, de- 
manded a revision of the constitution, arrayed themselves 
against the legislature, and demanded the redress of griev- 
ances with arms in their hands. Job Shattuck, one of their 
leaders, at the head of an armed force, look possession of 
the court-house at Worcester, and sent a written message to 



66 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

the judges, "that it was the sense of the people, that the 
courts should not sit." " They thought themselves," says 
Minot, the historian of the insurrection, " they thought them- 
selves to be a majority of the people, as some pretended, 
and so vested with a supreme power of altering whatever 
appeared to them to be wrong in the polity of the country." 
Washington was asked to use his great personal influence to 
stay the mad proceedings of the rebels. He replied : 

" You talk, my good Sir, of employing influence to appease 
the present tumults in Massachusetts. I know not where that 
influence is to be found ; nor, if attainable, that it would be a 
proper remedy for these disorders. Influence is not govern- 
ment. Let us have a government, by which our lives, liberties, 
and properties will be secured, or let us know the worst at once." 

" Let the reins of government then be braced," he continued, 
" and held with a steady hand ; and every violation of the con- 
stitution be reprehended. If defective, let it be amended ; but 
not suffered to be trampled upon while it has existence.'''' 

Mr. Madison, also, in a number of the " Federalist," 
alluding to this very rebellion, says : 

" At first view, it might not seem to square with the republi- 
can theory, to suppose either that a majority have not the right, 
or that a minority will have the force, to subvert a government ; 
and, consequently, that the federal interposition can never be re- 
quired, but when it would be improper. But theoretic reasoning 
in this, as in most cases, must be qualified by the lessons of 
practice. Why may not illicit combinations for purposes of vi- 
olence be formed as well by a majority of a State, especially of 
a small State, as by a majority of a county, or a district of the 
same State ; and if the authority of the State ought, in the latter 
case, to protect the local magistracy, ought not the federal au- 
thority, in the former, to support the State authority f " 

At last, by great exertions on the part of the government 
and the well affected citizens, an army of four thousand men, 
under General Lincoln, was fitted out, and after a very se- 
vere campaign in the midst of winter, this dangerous insur- 
rection was suppressed with but little loss of life.* Not one 

* If our brethren in Rhode Island have had some cause to complain of 
the laxity and unfriendliness of the government of INIassachusetls, in not 
affording them sufficient aid and countenance during the recent disturb- 
ances, we may refer them to the Shays rebellion, as showing the other side 
of the picture, and proving that they were not always very active in their 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 67 

of the rebels suifered capital punishment, though many had 
richly deserved that fate. 

We cannot dwell upon the history of the rebellion in 
Pennsylvania. There, too, a great majority of the people in 
the disaffected country were banded together in open oppo- 
shion to the government and the laws. Their conduct was 
such, says Pitkin, " that no alternative was left, but either 
to surrender the government into the hands of the lawless 
and disobedient, or compel submission by military force." 
President Washington issued a proclamation, declaring "that 
the very existence of the government, and the fundamental 
principles of social order, are materially involved in the 
issue," and requiring the insurgents to disperse and retire to 
their homes. When this had no effect, by calling out the 
militia of the neighbouring States, he assembled a force of 
over twelve thousand men, and with its aid effectually quell- 
ed the insurrection. Mercy was again shown to the van- 
quished. 

But what chiefly distinguishes the rebellion in Rhode 
Island both from the one in Massachusetts, and from that in 
Pennsylvania, and which aggravates the criminality of the 
former in the highest degree, is the fact, that redress of the 
only grievances, of which the disaffected party complained, 
was offered to them in the incipient stages of their revolt, 
and was refused. They were permitted to vote, in Febru- 
ary, 1842, upon the "Landholders' Constitution," which 
would have established a government in every respect unex- 
ceptionable, and they rejected it. For the first time, per- 

duties towards us. After the main body of the insurgents was defeated and 
dispersed, parties of them took refuge in the neighbouring States, and con- 
tinued to keep up the alarm and excitement in the border towns, by re- 
turninff to Massachusetts from time to time, and resuming their former 
measures. Governor Bowdoin applied to the executive authorities of these 
Stales to put an end to such irregular proceedings, and to apprehend and 
deliver up the refugees. In most instances, the application was successful, 
but not in all. The historian Minot shall tell the rest. 

" But the authority of Rhode Island was far from taking steps to secure 
the fugitives from justice, who publicly resorted there. When a motion 
was made in their Assembly, upon the act of Massachusetts for apprehend- 
ing the principals of the rebellion being read, that a law should be passed, 
requesting the Governor to issue a proclamation for apprehending them, 
if within that State, it was lost by a great majority; arid one. of the very 
refusTces was allowed a seat within their chamber." Minot's History of 
the Insurrection, p. 152. 

" Mutate nomine, de te fabula narratur." 



68 The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 

haps, in the annals of the world, the people declared, that 
they would not have reform, and preferred revolution. They 
stood out upon a mere punctilio, saying that they would not 
accept the matter as a gift, but were determined to seize 
upon it by an armed force, as their own right. They acted 
as if it were a light thing to kindle the flames of civil war, 
to array members of the same family on opposite sides, and 
to destroy by violence the constituted authority of the State. 
No language is too strong to be applied to such nefarious 
and inhuman conduct. We justly shrink with horror from 
the man who has struck his parent. But what can be 
thought of him, who raises a parricidal hand against his coun- 
try, the common parent of all, to whom every reasonable 
being owes the greatest measure of filial homage and obe- 
dience ? Therefore has treason always been distinguished 
as the highest crime known to the law, and the traitor is 
singled out for the universal detestation of mankind. 

These remarks do not tend in the slightest degree to dis- 
parage the motives or the conduct of the illustrious men who 
have been found, in all ages of the world, eager to withstand 
oppression, and to contend in the cause of freedom and of 
right, against an unjust and arbitrary government, though at 
the hazard of their lives, and of every thing which renders 
life desirable. Honor, everlasting honor, to their memories, 
whether they perished upon the scaffold, or lived to enjoy a 
nation's gratitude, and "read their triumph in a nation's 
eyes ! " But " the sacred right of revolution," as it has been 
aptly termed, is not to be brought out of its shrine on any 
mean or ordinary occasion. It must not be used as a cloak 
for ambitious usurpation, for reckless love of change, or for 
treacherous revolt. A grave and fearful responsibility rests 
upon those who exercise it, and unless the cause be just, 
and the necessity of the case be urgent, not even a success- 
ful issue of the contest will relieve them, in the judgment 
of posterity, from the censure due to the traitor and the 
enemy of his native land. The patriot's fame depends as 
much on the caution and reluctance with which he unsettles 
the foundations of government, and opposes the established 
authorities of the state, as on the courage and perseverance 
which he manifests in the midst of the strife. He is an- 
swerable for all the misery and desolation that follow in the 
train of civil war ; for the evil passions that are excited ; 



The Recent Contest in Rhode Island. 69 

for the blood that is shed ; for the affections that are 
sundered ; for the quiet of many a peaceful family that is 
interrupted, and the happiness of many a fireside that is 
destroyed ; and great must be the interests at stake, noble 
must be the principles for which he contends, or he will 
find the burden of this responsibility too heavy to be borne. 
He will sink under it, amidst the execrations of those who 
owe to him the ruin of their prosperity, and the wreck of 
their dearest hopes. 

Loyalty is not an unmeaning word in a republic. It is 
due to the free institutions by which we are surrounded, to 
the establishments created by the wisdom of our fathers, and 
transmitted as the noblest heritage to their children. To 
cherish this feeling is our best safeguard against anarchy and 
licentiousness, evils which, in a modern democracy, are to 
be feared at least as much as oppression and misrule. Pa- 
triotism was considered as the highest virtue in the Roman 
republic, and it has lost none of its value or significance in 
these our times. Its object, indeed, is not the ground on 
which we tread, nor the homes wherein we dwell, nor the 
individuals whom we call our countrymen, though with most 
of them we have no nearer connexion than if they lived on 
the other side of the boundary line. Its object is rather the 
body politic of which we are a part ; it is the state to which 
we owe allegiance ; it is the government, by whose acts we 
are bound. This obligation may quickly be broken, it is 
true ; the tie may easily be ruptured, for it is the nature of 
a popular government to rest lightly upon the community, 
and to be guarded only by the affections of those over whom 
it extends. But if the act be rashly or recklessly done, it will 
be the sure source of misery and strife, that can end only in 
the prostration of our liberties, by subjection to the yoke of 
another country, or to the hard rule of a military despot. 



.Q 









jj y^\j^ : • „ ,. 



>j^A« 






m^hm 









lO"^^-^ 



V-' >^^^ rlf';^^'^^ .:-^^■.: vvW'v^ ■^^-- 












:«4^. 



mm 









yV ^^UV 



,^riS.«^^ 









m<i^^^ 






'\^)m 






^'^.-ss 












Wff 





















'^\i^\J 






LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



i. li: Hill nil mil II 
014 111 344 6 # 



